The  person  charging  this  material  is  re- 
sponsible for  its  return  on  or  before  the 
Latest  Date  stamped  below. 

Theft,  mutilation,  and  underlining  of  books 
are  reasons  for  disciplinary  action  and  may 
result  in  dismissal  from  the  University. 

University  of  Illinois  Library 


L161— O-1096 


THE  FAITH  OF  THE  GOSPEL 


The  Faith  of  the  Gospel 


^  iilanual  of  (ii:{)ristian  i^octdne 


BY 

ARTHUR   JAMES   MASON,  B.D. 

FORMERLY  FELLOW  OF  TRINITY  COLLEGE,  CAMBRIDGE 


'  IVith  one  soul  striving  together  with  the  Faith  of  the  Gospel" 


THIRD   EDITION,  REVISED 


E.    p.    BUTTON    AND    CO     P  A  N  Y 

PUBLISHERS   AND  IMPORTERS 
31  WEST  TWENTY-THIRD  STREET 
1891 


DEDICATED  TO 

JOSEPH, 

JSisJjop  of  IBurfjam, 

AND 

BROOKE  FOSS  WESTCOTT, 

i^fgms  ^Proffssor  of  iBibmitg  at  (JTambritigf, 

TO  WHOM  I  OWE  IT  IF  I  MAY  STILL  HOPE 
TO  BEGIN  TO  BE  A  DISCIPLE. 


PREFACE 


The  writer  of  this  book  was  drawn  to  his  task  in 
the  first  instance  by  his  experience  in  conductinj^ 
Missions.  It  has  always  formed  part  of  his  plan  on 
such  occasions  to  give  consecutive  Instructions  on  tlie 
leading  doctrines  of  the  Gospel.  Twice,  especially,  in 
the  year  1885, — at  S.  George's,  Hanover  Square,  and 
at  Stoke  Damerel, — it  was  his  privilege  to  deliver  a 
course  of  the  kind  to  large  audiences  of  cultivated 
persons,  many  of  whom  desired  to  l)e  directed  to  some 
book  wdiich  would  contain  such  an  exposition  of  the 
faith  as  they  had  listened  to.  It  was  difficult  to  satisfy 
the  demand  by  suggesting  already  published  works. 
Tlie  modern  English  books  which  have  dealt  with  the 
field  of  dogma  as  a  whole  liave,  perhaps,  been  either 
too  condensed  for  the  ordinary  I'cader,  or  too  sliglit 
for  the  thouglitful.  Many  of  them  have  had  the 
disadvantage  of  appearing  in  the  unattracti\'e  guise 
of  Commentaries  on  the  Thirty-Nine  Articles,  or  in 
some  other  shape  not  suited  t(^  freedom  and  breadth 
of  treatment. 


viii 


Preface, 


This  history  of  the  origin  of  the  present  book  will 
explain  its  form.  While  attempting  to  go  with  fair 
thoroughness  into  the  various  questions  raised,  it  does 
not  profess  to  deal  with  them  exhaustively,  as  a  book 
written  for  the  learned  would.  It  assumes  little  in 
the  reader  besides  an  average  English  education  and 
a  devout  mind.  Recondite  theological  language  is 
avoided.  Terms  are  explained  as  they  occur.  It  is 
hoped,  therefore,  that  the  book  may  prove  useful, 
not  only  to  Teachers  of  the  Divine  Mysteries  at  the 
beginning  of  their  studies,  but  to  many  private  Chris- 
tians also,  who  wish  to  have  an  intelligent  grasp  of 
their  faith. 

Dogmatic  Theology  lies  very  near,  in  its  purpose, 
to  Apologetics.  Its  object  is  not  merely  to  state  in 
orthodox  language  the  sum  of  what  is  to  be  believed, 
but  to  commend  what  it  states  by  shewing  its  inherent 
reasonableness.  At  the  same  time,  it  differs  from 
Apologetics  inasmuch  as  it  assumes  that  the  student 
is  already  a  believer,  and  only  needs  to  have  his  mind 
cleared  and  his  faith  made  explicit.  It  does  not  prove 
every  point  as  it  goes  along;  it  suggests,  and  explains, 
and  connects.  If  such  a  word  may  be  used  in  connexion 
with  a  popular  handbook,  our  object  in  Dogmatics  is 
to  exhibit  a  Christian  Philosophy.  Mere  correctness 
in  tlie  use  of  terms  mi^^lit  be  taucjht  in  the  form  of  a 
dictionary;  but  the  dogmatic  teacher  wishes  to  shew  the 
beai'ings  of  things,  to  displny  tln^  unity  of  trutli,  to  give 


Preface. 


an  idea  o£  the  structure  and  system  in  which  the  lives 
of  men  are  placed.  But  in  order  that  it  may  be  truly 
a  Christian  Philosophy,  and  not,  like  the  systems  of 
the  Gnostics,  a  human  fabric  borrowing  elements  from 
the  Gospel,  it  must  needs  start  with  faith  in  Christ, 
endeavouring  purely  to  arrive  at  the  inward  meaning 
of  His  words,  and  to  piece  together  the  fragments  of 
truth  which  it  is  able  to  apprehend,  in  no  arbitrary 
fashion,  but  in  the  way  in  which  the  Church  has 
always  grouped  them. 

A  work  of  this  nature  is  only  by  accident  con- 
troversial. It  does  not  aim  at  exposing  errors, 
although  it  does  so  when  contrast  with  the  error 
serves  to  elucidate  the  truth.  Controversy  is  a  form 
of  Apologetics  in  which  the  opponent,  instead  of 
standing  outside  the  faith  altogether,  claims  to  be  the 
true  representative  of  it.  With  such  persons  the 
dogmatic  teacher  is  not  directly  concerned ;  he  is  only 
concerned  with  them  so  far  as  it  may  be  useful  to 
caution  the  learner  against  them.  This  book  is  not 
an  appeal  to  those  who  differ  from  the  Church,  but 
an  attempt  to  help  those  who  profess  allegiance  to 
her.  Nevertheless,  it  would  be  vain  to  deny  that  the 
writer  has  had  throughout  a  wider  outlook.  He  is 
not  much  disposed  to  believe  in  controversy  as  a 
means  of  producing  agreement,  and  inclines  to  think 
that  the  positive  statement  of  belief  acts  much  more 
convincingly  upon  honest  divergence  than  any  amount 

h 


X 


Preface. 


of  negative  criticism.  It  is  his  most  earnest  hope 
that  this  book  may  contribute  something  to  the  cause 
of  Christian  unity.  If  any  word  is  contained  within 
its  pages  which  sounds  impatient,  or  bitter,  or  in- 
flammatory, or  supercilious,  or  in  any  way  uncharitable 
towards  those  who  differ  from  us,  whether  Protestants 
or  in  the  Roman  or  Oriental  Communions,  that  word 
is  withdrawn  beforehand,  as  belying  the  deepest 
feelings  of  the  writer  s  heart.  There  are  difficulties 
enough  in  the  way  of  agreement  upon  doctrines  so 
mysterious,  and  covering  so  wide  a  field,  without 
cheating  fresh  obstacles  by  want  of  tenderness  and 
sympathy.  But  yet,  if  real  agreement  is  ever  to  be 
reached,  it  can  only  be  reached  by  frank  and  trustful 
avowal  of  the  points  of  difference,  not  by  hushing  them 
up.  Unity  must  be  based  on  a  real  understanding  of 
one  another,  and  no  man  can  sever  those  two  things 
which  the  Prophet  joined  so  closely  together  when  he 
said,  Execute  the  judgment  of  truth  and  peace  in 
your  gates,  saith  the  Lord"  (Zech.  viii.  16). 

If  there  is  an  object  still  more  to  be  sought  in  a 
work  of  this  kind  than  the  union  of  Christians  amongst 
tliemselves,  it  is  to  lead  souls  to  a  worthier  adora- 
tion of  God  and  a  life  of  trustful  obedience.  At  every 
moment.  Dogmatic  Theology  touches  Ethics.  A  manual 
of  Christian  doctrine  is  not  a  volume  of  sermons ;  yet 
in  some  ways  it  ought  to  answer  the  same  purposes. 
There  is  a  restfulness  in  sometimes  escaping  from  the 


Preface. 


xi 


thought  o£  ourselves,  and  observing  what  things  are, 
irrespective  of  our  relations  to  them.  The  Christian 
heart  will  easily  and  instinctively  deduce  comfort 
and  warning,  moral  direction  and  devotional  attitude, 
from  an  intelligent  survey  of  Christian  truth.  While 
this  book  is  not  written  for  the  purpose  of  stirring  tlie 
emotions  or  guiding  the  will,  it  is  hoped  at  least  that 
nothing  will  be  found  'in  it  which  chills  the  spirit  of 
worship,  or  diverts  the  ethical  intention. 

It  would  be  impossible  for  the  writer  to  ac- 
knowledge what  he  owes  to  other  minds,  without 
composing  an  autobiography.  All  the  influences  of 
a  lifetime  combine  to  form  a  man's  belief.  To  dis- 
entangle what  has  been  learned  from  holy  parents, 
from  schoolmasters,  in  sermons,  in  intercourse  with 
friends,  and  in  a  hundred  chance  ways,  would  be  an 
interminable  occupation.  Nevertheless,  the  writer 
would  acknowledge  once  more  his  paramount  obliga- 
tion to  the  two  great  Divines  whose  names  he  has  in- 
scribed upon  the  dedicatory  page.  Their  printed  works, 
their  public  lectures  and  instructions,  the  privilege  of 
private  conversation  with  them,  have  conveyed  to  him 
— or  it  is  his  own  fault — immeasurably  more  than  he 
can  reproduce  in  words.  He  ought  to  apologize  for 
taking,  without  leave,  such  a  liberty  with  their  names  ; 
but  he  hopes  that  if  in  anything  his  conclusions  are 
not  what  they  would  wish,  at  any  rate  the  book  is  not 
wholly  destitute  of  their  spirit.    Students  who  are 


xii 


Preface, 


acquainted  with  Martensen's  Christian  Dogmatics  will 
discern  in  the  following  pages  many  reminiscences  of 
that  noble  book.  These  last  years  have  been  very 
fruitful  of  strong  and  reverent  exegesis  of  Holy  Scrip- 
ture, which  is  the  material  for  Dogmatics.  It  would 
be  ungrateful  not  to  name  the  Commentaries  of  Pro- 
fessor Godet  as  having  laid  the  pi'esent  writer  under 
specially  deep  obligations.  For  a  general  view  of 
modern  Roman  theology  he  has  chiefly  used  the 
Theologie  Dogmatique  of  Cardinal  Gousset,  and  for 
that  of  the  Oriental  Church,  the  work  of  the  Russian 
Bishop  Macarius,  bearing  a  similar  title. 

Three  dear  friends  of  the  author  have  kindly  gone 
through  the  labour  of  reading  his  proofs.  But  for 
their  strictures  and  suggestions,  the  work  would  be 
far  more  imperfect  even  than  it  is.  They  know  how 
sincerely  grateful  to  them  the  author  is ;  but  he  does 
not  mention  who  they  are,  lest  he  should  seem  to 
shelter  himself  under  well-known  names  from  criticism 
which  ought  to  be  borne  by  himself  alone. 

He  hopes  that  it  is  not  necessary  to  add,  that  if 
unwittingly  and  unwillingly  he  has  misrepresented  in 
anything  the  doctrine  of  the  Church,  he  submits  him- 
self unreservedly  to  correction. 

Aluiallows  Bakkino, 
Octohery  1887. 


PREFACE  TO  THE  SECOND 
EDITION 


It  is  impossible  for  the  writer  of  this  book  to  express 
his  thankfulness  for  the  way  in  which  the  first  edition, 
with  all  its  blemishes,  has  been  received,  by  prelates 
and  theologians  as  well  as  by  simple  believers,  both 
in  England  and  in  America,  and  for  the  tokens  of 
God's  blessing  upon  it. 

In  preparing  the  second  edition,  he  has  had  the 
help  of  careful  reviews  which  have  appeared  in  public, 
— and  also  of  a  great  number  of  private  criticisms,  from 
very  different  points  of  view — some  of  them  remark- 
ably full  and  able.  He  desires  to  thank  cordially  all 
those  who  have  thus  aided  him,  and  hopes  that  in  many 
instances  they  will  be  fairly  satisfied  with  the  altera- 
tions which  will  be  found  in  the  present  text  of  his 
work.  If  in  any  case  he  has  thought  it  best  to  retain 
what  was  originally  written,  he  trusts  that  it  will  not 
be  thought  that  it  is  for  want  of  a  deferent  considera- 
tion of  the  arguments  of  his  critics. 

The  first  chapter  of  the  book  has  now  been  re- 


xiv 


Preface  to  the  Second  Edition. 


arranged  and  enlarged,  so  as  to  be  more  in  proportion, 
it  is  hoped,  to  the  subsequent  chapters.  A  table  of 
the  references  to  the  Fathers  will  be  found  at  the 
end,  for  the  use  of  any  students  who  may  wish  to 
consult  the  originals. 

Allhallovv^s  Catiking, 
November  y  1888. 


NOTE  TO  THE  THIRD  EDITION 

For  the  carefully  prepared  index  of  Scripture  texts 
referred  to  in  this  work,  the  author  is  indebted  to 
the  kindness  of  the  Rev.  John  Kitchingman,  Rector 
of  Bonsall.  Beyond  the  introduction  of  this  index, 
and  the  correction  of  a  few  misprints,  no  other  altera- 
tion has  been  made  in  the  present  edition. 


CONTENTS 


Chapter  L 

PAGE 


I.  The  Existence  of  God 

(i.)  a  matter  of  faith,  not  of  proof  (§  i)   i 

(ii.)  but  of  reasonable  certainty  (§2)   3 

Evinced  by 

(a)  the  general  consent  of  men  (§  3)  .     .     •     •    .  5 

(^)  the  existence  of  the  world  (§4)   7 

(c)  the  phenomena  of  matter   8 

of  life   9 

of  consciousness   11 

of  evolution  and  adaptation      .  12 

{d)  our  mental  constitution  and  moral  conscience  (§5)  14 

(iii.)  confirmed  by  revelation  (§6)   16 

(iv.)  verified  by  Christian  experience  (§7)   18 

II.  The  Nature  of  God 

(i.)  as  spirit  (§8)   20 

(ii.)  self-existent  (§9)   21 

III.  The  Attributes  of  God 

(i.)  incomprehensible  (§10)   22 

(ii.)  one  (§  II)   24 

(iii.)  infinite  (§12)   26 

in  knowledge   26 

in  regard  to  space   27 

in  regard  to  time  ,  29 

in  power  ,  33 


XVI 


Contents. 


PAGE 

IV.  The  Character  of  God 

(i.)  holiness  (§13)  35 

(ii.)  love  (§14)  39 


Chapter  II. 

The  Athanasian  Creed  the  Church's  expression  of  responsibility 

for  the  truth  (§  i)  41 

Passages  of  the  Scriptures  clearly  revealing 

(i.)  a  Unity  in  Trinity  (§2)  43 

(ii.)  a  Trinity  in  Unity  44 

I.  The  True  Doctrine  oprosED  to 

(i.)  Tritheism,  the  notion  of  three  Gods  (§  3)    ....  45 

(ii.)  Sabellianism,  an  unreal  distinction  of  Persons  (§  4)  .  49 
(iii.)  Arianism,  a  denial  of  the  Eternal  Godhead  of  the  Son 

and  Spirit  (§  5)   51 

apparent  simpHcity  of  Arianism,   and    its  real 

difficulty   52 

II.  The  Idea  of  God  requires 

(i.)  an  eternal  reproduction  of  Himself  (§  6)     ....  56 

(ii.)  in  a  Person  equal  to  Himself  57 

(iii.)  bound  to  Himself  in  conscious  freedom  58 

HI.  Such  is  the  Scriptural  Doctrine  of 

(i.)  the  Father  (§7)   59 

(ii.)  the  Word   60 

(iii.)  the  Spirit    62 

IV.  Subordination  of  the  Son  and  Spirit  to  the  Fathek, 

AS  the  Sole  Fountain  of  Deity  (§  8)  .    .    .    .  63 


Contents. 


xvii 


Chapter  III. 

PAGE 

I.  The  Doctrine  of  the  Holy  Trinity  leads  to  a  Right 
View  of  the  Relation  of  the  World  to  God 
(i.)  as  opposed  to  Pantheism,  by  shewing  the  independence 

ofGod(§i)   70 

His  purpose  in  creation  (§2)   71 

(ii.)  as  opposed  to  Deism,  by  giving  a  starting-point  for 

creation  (§3)   74 

H.  The  Place  of  the  Word  in  the  Divine  Being 

(i.)  the  world  ideally  pre-existent  in  Him  (§  4)  .     .     .     o  75 

(ii.)  and  made  and  sustained  through  Him  (§5).    .    .     .  80 

HI.  The  Angels  (§  6) 

(i.)  their  relation  to  nature   81 

(ii.)  their  relation  to  man   83 

(iii. )  their  relation  to  each  other   85 

(iv.)  their  power   85 

(v.)  their  personality   87 

IV.  Revelation  and  Science  (§7)   88 

The  Mosaic  account  of  creation  as  a  progressive  work  (§8)  90 

culminating  in  the  production  of  Man  (§9)   92 

Chapter  IV. 

Man  the  created  Image  of  God  (§1)   94 

(i.)  his  body  (§2)   95 

(ii.)  his  spirit  (§3)   97 

(iii.)  his  soul  (§4)   97 

H.  His  Original  Righteousness 

to  be  secured  through  temptation  (§5)   99 

Mystic  account  of  the  temptation  (§  6)  .    ,    .    ,    .  ,101 


xviii 


Contents. 


PAGE 

III.  The  Origin  of  Evil 

Seduction  of  Man  (§7)   103 

The  Devil  and  his  history   105 

IV.  Th£  Unity  of  the  Human  Race  (§  8)   .    .    •    •    •  io9 

(i.)  Traducianism  and  Creatianism  (§9)   112 

(ii.)  hereditary  sin  (§10)   114 

(iii.)  the  slavery  of  the  will  (§11)   117 

(iv.)  humanity  still  capable  of  recovery  (§  12)    ....  119 


Chapter  V. 
Wc^i  incarnation  of  tfje  TOorb  of  (Kolr* 

The  hope  of  recovery  for  the  fallen  race  in  Christ  (§1)    .     .     .  120 

I.  Preparation  for  the  Incarnation  (§2)   121 

(i.)  of  the  Word  Himself   122 

(ii.)  of  mankind 

{a)  heathen   123 

{b)  Jewish  .124 

(iii.)  Teleology  of  History  (§3)   126 

IT.  The  Miraculous  Conception  of  Christ  (§  4)   .    .    .  127 

Obscured  by  doctrine  of  miraculous  conce^Dtion  of  Mary  .  129 

in.  The  Hypostatic  Union 

(i.)  as  opposed  to  Nestorianism  (§5)   131 

necessitates  impersonahty  of  the  manhood  (§  6)  .  135 

(ii.)  as  opposed  to  the  theory  of  God  converted  into  flesh  (§  7)  138 

(iii.)  as  opposed  to  Monophysitism  (§8)  ,  139 

(iv.)  as  opposed  to  Eutychianism  (§9)   140 

IV.  Both  Natures  perfect  in  Christ  (§10)   145 

V.  Accommodation  of  the  Natures  to  each  other 

(i.)  of  the  human  to  the  Divine  (§  II)   149 

ii.)  of  the  Divine  to  the  human  (^12         .    •    .    .    .  152 


Contents.  xix 


Chapter  VI. 

PAGE 

Christ  the  natural  Mediator  between  God  and  Man  (§  i) 

(i.)  as  Son  of  God  i6o 

(ii.)  as  Son  of  Man  i6i 

I.  Relation  of  the  Incarnation  to  the  Atonement 

(i.)  fittingness  of  the  Incarnation  apart  from  Redemption  (§  2)  162 
(ii.)  Redemption  possible  by  other  means  (§  3)  .  .  .  .  165 
(iii.)  the  benefits  of  the  Incarnation  net  commensurate  with 

Redemption  (§4)  167 

(iv.)  the  Incarnation  revealed  as  the  eternal  purpose  of  God 

(§5)  168 

Simplicity  of  the  Catholic  Doctrine  of  the  Atonement  (§6)   .    .  171 

II.  God's  Character  revealed 

{a)  in  Christ's  life  (§  7)  173 

{b)  in  His  words  (§  8)  175 

(i.)  as  reconciling  men  to  Himself  (§9)  177 

(ii.)  as  suffering  in  His  Son's  Person  (§10)  180 

(iii.)  as  vindicating  His  own  righteousness  thereby  (§11)  182 

III.  Christ  as  the  Representative  Man  satisfies  the 

Divine  Righteousness 

(i.)  by  His  life  (§  12)  183 

(ii.)  sinless  under  temptation  (§13)  186 

(iii.)  and  ideally  perfect  (§14)  190 

(iv.)  obedient  under  suffering  (§15)  191 

(v.)  even  unto  death  (§16)     .    .    .  193 

(vi.)  and  that  the  death  of  the  Cross  (§17)  195 

IV.  Christ  as  the  Representative  Man  satisfies  the 

Divine  Righteousness 
(i.)  by  His  death  considered  as  a  confession  of  men's  sin 

(§18)  198 

(ii.)  by  actually  enduring  the  penalty  of  sin  (§  19)  .    .     .  203 
(iii.)  not  as  a  substitute  for  us,  but  as  our  surety  (§  20)  .     .  205 
Our  salvation  not  dependent  on  holding  a  right  theory  of  the 

Atonement,  but  on  the  fact  itself  (§21)  208 


XX 


Contents. 


Chapter  VII. 
^f)e  Ei'seit  2Lortr,  ant(  tj^e  61ft  of  t{)e  Spirit. 

r-AGE 

I.        (i.)  Christ's  Death  a  true  Death  (§1)   211 

{a)  The  Descent  into  Hell   212 

{b)  The  incorruption  of  His  body   212 

(ii.)  His  Resurrection  (§2)   213 

(^)  real   214 

{J))  to  a  new  life   215 

{c)  not  merely  for  our  sakes   215 

(iii.)  His  Ascension   216 

(iv.)  His  Return  hereafter   216 

n.  His  New  Work  for  Men  (§3)   217 

(i.)  intercession   218 

(ii.)  obtaining  for  us  the  gift  of  the  Spirit   219 

in.  The  Holy  Ghost  (§  4) 

(i.)  His  eternal  procession     .   220 

(ii.)  His  personality   221 

(iii.)  His  relation  to  our  Lord  as  Man  (§5)   222 

(iv.)  His  characteristic  work  in  the  world  (§  6)  .  .  .  .  225 
(v.)  difference  between  His  work  before  the  Incarnation 

and  after  (§7)   227 

IV.  Formation  and  Illumination  of  the  Church  (§  8) .  229 

(i.)  The  Body  of  Christ  (§9)  .     .  ' "^'T*"^.*'-,    .     .  230 

(ii.)  The  Communion  of  Saints  (§10)   233 

Chapter  VIII. 

^fje  CTfjaracteristics  of  tljc  CTfjuvcfj. 

The   Notes  of  the  Church   not  visible   tokens   but  inward 

characteristics  (§1)   237 

I.  The  Church  One  by  reason  of  Oneness  of  Historical 

Life  (§2)   238 

Her  unity  not  destroyed  by 

(i.)  schisms  from  her                                         ...  239 

(ii.)  interrupted  Communion  within  her   241 


Contents,  xxi 


PAGE 

II.  The  Church  Holy  by  reason  of  the  Holiness  of  that 

WHICH  IS  entrusted  TO  HER  (§3)   245 

HI.  The  Church  Catholic  (§4)   248 

(i.)  by  universal  adaptation   249 

(ii.)  more  especially  by  universality  of  truth   250 

Her  Catholicity  secured 

(i.)  by  Tradition  (§5)   251 

(ii.)  by  Scripture   253 

The  Bible  (§  6) 

{a)  its  Inspiration   254 

{h)  its  completeness   257 

{c)  development  of  doctrine  from  it   258 

Freedom  of  individual  investigation  and  Authority  of  the 

Church  (§7)   259 

IV,  The  Church  Apostolic  by  reason  of  her  unfailing 

Mission  (§8)   263 

The  Christian  Ministry  (§9)   265 

Identity  of  the  Church  Militant  and  Triumphant  (§  10)    .    .     .  270 

Chapter  IX. 
^fje  JHeans  of  6race, 

The  Object  of  the  Means  of  Grace  both  social  and  individual  (§  i)  272 

I.  The  Word  of  God  (§2)   273 

The  underlying  principle  of  the  Sacraments  (§3)   276 

Their  number^ (§  4)   283 

II.  Baptism 

(i.)  incorporation  into  Christ  (§5)   285 

(ii.)  the  washing  away  of  sin  (§  6)   288 

(iii.)  regeneration  (§7)   291 

Baptism  of  infants  (§8)   295 

Administration  of  the  Sacrament  (§  9)    .    .    •    .  297 

III.  Confirmation 

(i.)  its  connexion  with  Baptism  (§10)   298 

(ii.)  its  distinctive  gift                                                .  299 

Administration  of  it  (§  II)   302 


xxii 


Contents. 


PAGE 

IV.  The  Eucharist 

(i.)  The  fundamental  conception  of  it  (§  12)     ....  303 

(ii.)  The  Real  Presence  (§13)   306 

{a)  insufficiency  of  the  Calvinistic  view  of  a  purely 

spiritual  presence   308 

{b)  unsatisfactoriness  of  the  Roman  doctrine  of  tran- 

substantiation                                          .  309 

{c)  doctrine  of  the  English  Church   311 

(iii.)  The  communion  of  Christ's  Body  (§  14)     .     .     .     .  315 

(^)  present  conditions  of  Christ's  Body   .    .     .    .  315 

(h)  its  connexion  with  the  mystical  Body     .     .     .  317 

(c)  participation  in  it  impossible  except  by  faith     .  319 

(iv.)  The  Blood  of  Christ  (§15)   320 

Its  special  connexion  with  our  need  as  sinners  .    .  324 

(v.)  The  Eucharist  as  a  Sacrifice  (§16)   325 

(vi.)  Christian  Prayer  as  connected  with  it  (§  17)     .     .    .  331 

V.  Penance  (§  18) 

(i.)  its  connexion  with  Baptism                                   .  334 

(ii.)  the  sacramental  character  of  it  contained  in  the 

Absolution   336 

(iii.)  public  and  private  Absolution     0    .    ,    .     .    .     .  337 

(iv.)  confession   337 

VI.  Unction  of  the  Sick  (§19)   339 

VII.  Ordination  (§20)   340 

VIII.  Marriage  (§21)  ,    ,    ,    ,  341 


Chapter  X. 

Grace  personal  in  its  mode  of  operation  (§1)   343 

I.  Eorkknowledge  and  Election  (§2)   345 

Predestination  and  human  freedom  (§3)   349 


Contents.  xxiii 


PAGE 

II,  Grace  and  Free-will  (§  4) 

(i.)  Man's  will  free  and  not  free   352 

(ii.)  Pelagian  and  Semi-Pelagian  theories     .    .    .    »    .  353 

(iii.)  Grace  necessary  both  to  will  and  to  do   354 

(iv  )  Grace  not  irresistible   356 

III.  The  Christian  Course 

(i.)  Vocation  (§  5)   357 

(ii.)  Repentance  and  Faith  (§6)   359 

(iii.)  Conversion  (§7)   361 

(iv.)  Justification  (§  8) 

(a)  its  nature   363 

{J})  its  grounds   364 

{c)  when  given   368 

[d)  its  effect  of  peace  (§9)   369 

(v.)  Sanctification  (§  10) 

{a)  its  nature  and  working      .......  370 

{}))  special  development  in  the  Saints     .     .    .  .371 

(vi.)  Final  Perseverance  (§  II)   373 


Chapter  XI. 
^fje  East  ^!){nss» 


Probation  ends  with  death,  but  not  education  (§  I )     ....  375 

Importance  of  the  hour  of  death    .........  377 

I.  Condition  of  the  faithful  departed  (§  2) 

(i.)  Scriptural  names  for  it   378 

(ii.)  its  repose   379 

(iii.)  its  spiritual  activity     380 

(iv.)  its  penitential  aspect   381 

(v.)  its  timelessness  ,     .     .  384 

(vi.)  their  fellowship  with  each  other  .     .     .     .     .     .     •  3^.5 

(vii.)  and  with  Christ   3^5 

(viii. )  Prayers  for  the  dead   386 


xxiv  Contents. 

PAGE 

II.  Resurrection  of  the  Dead  (§3)   388 

(i.)  nature  of  the  resurrection  body   389 

(ii.)  difference  between  the  resurrection  of  the  righteous 

and  of  the  wicked   392 

III.  The  Second  Advent  of  Christ  (§4)   394 

(i.)  impossibility  of  calculating  the  date   395 

(ii.)  new  birth  of  the  creation   396 

(iii.)  Antichrist   397 

IV.  The  Final  Judgment  (§  5) 

(i.)  manifestation  of  all  truth   397 

(ii.)  separation  of  good  and  evil   399 

(iii. )  Person  of  the  Judge   400 

V.  Heaven  (§6)   400 

(i.)  Salvation   401 

(ii.)  Perfection  of  the  Blessed 

[a)  in  themselves   402 

{h)  in  relation  to  God   403 

(c)  in  relation  to  the  universe   404 

{d)  in  relation  to  each  other   405 

(iii.)  Degrees  of  blessedness   406 

(iv.)  and  of  authority   407 

(v.)  Relation  of  the  Elect  to  the  rest  of  mankind  (§  7)  .    .  408 

VI.  Hell  (§  8) 

(i.)  the  opposite  of  Heaven   410 

(ii.)  none  punished  beyond  their  deserts   412 

(iii.)  the  punishment,  not  of  past  acts,  but  of  permanent 

character   413 

(iv.)  the  punishment,  not  by  arbitrary  arrangement,  but  of 

natural  sequence   415 

(v.)  necessary  to  God's  justice   415 

(vi.)  and  to  His  love   417 

(vii.)  eternity  of  the  punishment    41S 

The  absolute  triumph  of  Divine  goodness  §  9)   420 


Chapter  I. 


Zi)t  llJciug  Kxit)  #latuvc  of  ®ot)* 

T/ic  Existence  of  God  a  matter  of  Faith,  not  of  Proof— Its  reasonable 
Certainty — Argument  from  Cojtsent  of  Alankind — Argument  from 
the  Phenomena  of  N'ature,  from  Life,  and  from  Consciousness — 
Argument  from  Human  Ideals  aitd  Conscience  —  Revelation  — 
Ver if  cation  of  the  Doctrine  by  Experience — Nature  of  God  as 
Spirit — His  Absolute  Existence — His  Incomprehensibleness — His 
Unity — His  Omniscieftce — His  Omnipresence — His  Eternity— His 
Omnipotence — His  Moral  Character — His  Love, 

It  is  no  part  o£  the  duty  of  one  who  expounds  the 
Christian  doctrine  to  prove — in  the  strict  sense  of  that 
word — the  existence  of  God.  Even  the  attempt  to 
exhibit  such  a  proof  belongs  by  rights  to  a  different 
department  of  study.  The  Christian  Church  does  not, 
in  the  first  instance,  seek  to  convince  men  by  argument 
that  God  is.  Her  voice  is  that  of  a  witness,  not  of  an 
uncertain  inquirer.  She  bears  testimony  to  what  she 
knows;  and,  instead  of  speculating  how  to  establish 
God's  existence,  she  teaches  men,  on  God's  authority, 
what  God  is.  Indeed,  if  we  follow  the  guidance  of 
Holy  Scripture,  we  shall  not  be  led  to  expect  that 
God's  existence  can  be  demonstrated  like  a  problem  in 
mathematics.    Although  the  Bible  is  full  of  appeals 

B 


2       God's  Existence  a  Matter  of  Faith. 


to  nature  and  history  and  conscience,  as  evidence  both 
of  the  being  and  of  the  character  of  God,  it  teaches 
also  that  this  evidence  needs  something  besides  in- 
tellect in  us,  if  its  force  is  to  be  felt.  ^'  By  faith  "  it 
says, "  we  apprehend  " — not  by  logical  necessity — "  that 
the  worlds  have  been  framed  by  a  word  of  God (Heb. 
xi.  3).  And  again,  lest  we  should  suppose  that,  under 
an  earlier  dispensation,  men  apprehended  the  exist- 
ence and  presence  of  God  in  some  more  direct  and 
easy  way  than  ourselves,  the  writer  of  the  Epistle  to 
the  Hebrews  tells  us  that  the  same  faculties  were 
required  and  the  same  difficulties  encountered  then  as 
now,  and  that  this  must  always  be  the  case.  "  By 
faith  Enoch  was  translated ;  for  before  his  translation 
witness  is  borne  to  him  that  he  had  pleased  God  " — 
so,  following  the  Septuagint,  he  renders  the  expression 
walked  Avith  God '  — "  but  without  faith,"  he  adds, "  it 
was  impossible  to  please  " — or  "  walk  with — "  Him ; 
for  he  that  cometh  unto  God  must  begin  by  an  act 
of  believing  (TTiarevaat)  that  He  is,  and  that  He  is 
found  a  Kewarder  to  them  that  seek  Him  out "  (Heb. 
xi.  5,  6).  If  the  logical  proof  of  God's  existence  were 
formally  complete  and  self-sufficient,  then  the  doubt 
or  denial  of  it  would  be  possible  only  for  dull  or  ill- 
informed  minds.  We  should  in  that  case  look  upon  a 
man  who  would  not  accept  the  evidence,  as  we  look 
upon  a  man  who  thinks  it  still  an  open  question 
whether  the  earth  is  round  or  flat.  His  stupidity  or 
liis  ignorance  would  move  our  pity  or  amusement. 
But,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  tlic  atlieist  is  not  always  dis- 
tinguished from  other  men  by  incapacity  for  following 


Unbelief  in  it  ctUpable.  3 


an  argument.^  The  fault  that  is  found  with  him  is 
graver  than  that.  There  is  nothing  culpable  in  a  want 
of  logic  ;  but  the  Bible  treats  as  culpable  a  man  who  is 
not  convinced  of  the  "  everlasting  power  and  divinity  " 
of  God  by  what  he  sees  around  him  (Rom.  i.  20).  He 
ought  to  have  been  convinced ;  and  this  implies  that 
conviction  is  partly  the  result  of  moral  causes,  and 
not  of  intellectual  considerations  only.  Not,  of  course, 
that  doubt  or  rejection  of  the  belief  in  God  implies 
base  and  sinister  motives  behind ;  but  it  implies  a  lack 
of  some  of  those  trustful  and  unsuspicious  qualities 
which  lead  simple-hearted  people  to  believe.  Thus, 
according  to  Holy  Scripture,  we  must  not  look  to  be 
led  by  a  process  of  dry  reasoning,  with  an  unmistake- 
able,  inevitable  certainty,  to  the  conclusion  that  God 
is.  There  is,  intellectually  speaking,  a  leap,  an  as- 
sumption to  be  made,  in  which  the  logical  faculty  is 
helped  out  by  other  faculties  in  our  nature. 

§  2. 

We  do  not  assert,  then,  that  the  existence  of  God 
is  to  us  on  the  same  footing  as  the  earth's  motion 
round  the  sun,  or  the  equality  of  the  angles  at  the  base 

^  The  saying  of  the  Psalmist,  The  fool  hath  said  in  his  heart, 
There  is  no  God  (Ps.  xiv.  1 ;  liii.  1),  is  sometimes  quoted  as  if  it 
asserted  the  contrary.  But  in  the  first  place,  in  the  Hebrew  concep- 
tion of  wisdom  and  folly,  the  intellectual  element  is  subordinated  to 
the  moral ;  and  in  the  second  place  the  proposition  is  by  no  means 
equivalent  to  the  proposition  that  "  the  man  who  says  in  his  heart, 
There  is  no  God,  is  a  fool."  The  Psalmist  teaches  that  when  a  man 
is  bent  upon  playing  the  fool,  he  is  forced  to  begin  by  becoming 
inwardly  (however  orthodox  his  outward  profession)  an  atheist; — he 
must  treat  God  as  non-existent. 


4  Reasonableness  of  the  Belief. 


of  an  isosceles  triangle — an  established  and  unques- 
tionable fact  of  science.  But,  at  the  same  time,  we 
claim  to  have  evidence  for  it  so  strong  as  to  put  the 
matter  beyond  all  reasonable  doubt.  The  proof  may 
not  be  formally  complete,  but  it  is  practically  certain. 
If  our  belief  in  God's  existence  rests  in  any  sense  upon 
an  assumption,  the  assumption  is  more  than  justified. 
Reasoning  alone  does  not,  perhaps,  force  us  over  the 
last  step ;  but  it  carries  us  all  the  way  up  to  it,  and 
meets  us  again  when  we  have  taken  it. 

It  is  not  as  if  our  conviction  were  the  result  of  a 
single,  slender  thread  of  argument,  where  the  unsound- 
ness of  one  proposition  might  invalidate  the  w^hole 
theory.  Indeed,  it  is  not  even  the  result  of  a  number 
of  disconnected  arguments,  which  could  be  taken  and 
demolished  one  by  one.  The  weight  of  the  various 
considerations  is  not  merely  the  aggregate  of  their 
several  weights.  They  grow  in  importance  and 
cogency  by  being  set  side  by  side,  until  at  last  it  is 
felt  that  the  convergence  of  so  many  different  lines  of 
thought  towards  a  belief  in  God  cannot  be  misleading, 
and  that  the  conclusion  so  naturally  and  obviously 
drawn  must  be  true. 

Certainly  no  other  theory  satisfies  all  the  demands 
of  reason  like  tlie  Christian  theory.  If  we  call  it 
impossible  to  prove  that  there  is  a  God,  we  know  it 
to  Ije  much  more  truly  impossible  to  prove  that  there 
is  not.  It  is  a  task  which  no  serious  thinker  has  ever 
attempted.  The  utmost  that  could  be  maintained  is 
tliat,  from  the  nature  of  the  case,  tlie  question  is 
incapable  of  being  solved  in  either  direction.  Agnos- 


Agnosticism  ajt  ttnworthy  thing.  5 


ticism — the  doctrine  that  it  is  impossible  for  us  to  be 
sure  whether  God  is  or  not — is  the  furthest  position 
that  logic  will  admit  of ;  and  to  be  an  agnostic — to 
give  up  all  hope  of  settling  so  weighty  a  question,  to 
say  that  the  evidence  is  so  scanty  or  so  complicated 
that  no  decision  can  be  safely  formed,  to  allow  tlic 
faculty  of  judgment  to  be  thus  completely  paralysed — 
appears  unworthy  of  human  nature,  an  intellectual 
cowardice,  a  despair  almost  amounting  to  treason,  and 
liable  to  take  the  heart  out  of  all  noble  inquiry. 
Christians  do  not  deny  that  there  are  difficulties  in 
the  way  of  belief,  but  they  hold  that  the  difficulties 
of  unbelief  are  far  greater,  and  that  in  Christianity 
they  have  the  key  by  which  at  last  every  door  of 
thought  may  be  unlocked  which  unbelief  only  bars 
more  firmly. 

1 3. 

Most  of  us,  to  begin  with,  believe  in  the  existence 
of  God  upon  the  authority  of  other  men.  We  are 
taught  it  in  childhood,  as  we  are  taught  other  facts 
and  theories,  by  our  elders.  As  we  grow  up,  we  have 
to  test  the  truth  of  it  for  ourselves.  Unless  we  are  of 
a  specially  sceptical  turn  of  mind,  we  start  with  a  not 
ungenerous  prejudice  in  favour  of  the  opinion.  It  is 
commended  to  us,  in  the  first  instance,  by  persons 
whom  we  are  inclined  by  nature  to  suppose  the  wisest 
and  best  on  earth.  We  find  later  on  that  their  belief 
is  shared  by  almost  all  the  world,  and  that  it  is  not 
one  of  the  products  of  civilization,  nor  traceable  to 
any  known  source  or  to  any  period  of  history.  Rude 


6  Argtunent  from  the  Common 


tribes,  in  all  quarters  of  the  globe,  and  from  the 
remotest  antiquity,  are  seen  to  have  .been  possessed 
by  the  belief  in  some  form  or  other.  Upon  this  fact 
has  been  founded  the  famous  argument  from  the 
common  consent  of  mankind.  It  has,  indeed,  very 
little  logical  weight — for,  even  if  there  were  no  tribes 
which  appear  to  have  lost  the  belief,  or  never  to  have 
had  it,  few  would  be  found  at  the  present  day  to 
argue  from  the  universality  of  the  belief  that  an  idea 
of  God  actually  forms  part  of  the  constitution  of 
human  nature.  The  utmost  that  can  be  validly 
argued  is,  that  human  nature  is  so  constituted  that 
the  belief  instinctively  commends  itself  to  men.  But 
if  the  argument  from  the  common  consent  is  lacking 
in  logical  force,  there  is  a  moral  impressiveness  about 
it,  which  raises  a  presumption  in  favour  of  belief. 
We  feel  it  to  be  unlikely  that  practically  the  whole 
race  should  be  wrong,  when,  with  such  an  extra- 
ordinary variety  of  form  and  circumstance,  it  testifies 
its  conviction  of  the  existence  of  unseen  powers.  If 
this  universal  conviction  is  a  delusion,  how  did  the 
delusion  arise  and  spread  so  far  ?  Its  existence  is  a 
positive  fact,  of  which  the  student  of  the  science  of 
humanity  is  bound  to  take  account;  and  it  cannot 
ljut  be  felt  how  liollow  and  unsatisfactory  are  all 
theories  which  trace  the  origin  of  religious  belief  to 
a  dread  of  ghosts,  or  such  like.  Whether  we  imagine 
some  primeval  revelation,  or  whether  we  suppose  the 
Ijclief  in  (iod's  existence  to  be  tlie  natural  impression 
left  upon  tlie  unsophisticated  mind  of  man  by  wliat 
lie  perceives  round  him  and  witlun  him,  when  guided 


Consent  of  Mankind. 


7 


by  the  Life  which  was  always  the  Light  of  men,  we 
cannot  refuse  to  acknowledge  that  the  fact  of  the 
belief  being  so  widespread  is  a  weighty  fact.  This 
somewhat  vague  and  uncritical  concession  to  the 
generally  received  tradition  acquires  a  more  solid 
value  when  we  find  all  the  greatest  names  in  science 
and  philosophy,  with  scarcely  an  exception,  in  all  ages, 
on  the  same  side  as  the  mass  of  men.  It  passes  into 
a  real  conviction  when  we  believe  on  a  deliberate 
survey  of  the  reasons  which  have  convinced  other 
thoughtful  minds.  We  can  then  say  to  parents  and 
teachers,  to  mankind  and  to  the  Church,  what  the 
men  of  Samaria  said  to  the  woman  in  the  Gospel,  that 
authority  had  done  its  work,  and  was  no  longer 
needed:  "Now  we  believe,  not  because  of  thy  saying: 
for  we  have  heard  for  ourselves,  and  know"  (S.  John 
iv.  42). 

§  4. 

The  train  of  thought  which  most  obviously  leads 
us  to  believe  in  the  existence  of  God  is  that  which 
results  from  the  consideration  of  the  world  we  live 
in.  Usually  the  very  existence  of  a  world  at  all 
has  been  held  to  show  the  existence  of  a  Creator. 
How,  it  has  been  asked,  could  the  world  have  come 
into  being,  if  there  had  been  no  God  to  make  it  ? 

Perhaps  in  its  popular  form  this  argument  has 
not  the  strength  that  is  often  assigned  to  it.  It  begs 
the  question.  If  it  can  be  proved  that  the  world  ever 
came  into  being,  there  must,  of  course,  have  been  a 
cause ;  but  apart  from  revelation,  it  is  not  positively 


8   Need  of  a  First  Cause  of  the  Universe. 


proved  that  the  world,  or  at  least  its  original  elements, 
ever  did  come  into  being.  But  even  had  there 
been  no  natural  indications  in  the  world  to  make  us 
think  of  a  First  Cause  of  the  universe  in  the  physical 
sense,  to  start  the  whole  series  of  physical  causation, 
there  would  still  have  been  facts  to  deal  with  of  a 
more  recondite,  but  perhaps  as  cogent,  a  kind.  Onto- 
logical  considerations — that  is  to  say,  those  which  are 
concerned  with  the  inner  problems  of  existence — 
suggest  the  need  of  a  First  Cause  in  a  totally  different 
sense.  We  have  to  ask,  not  only  how  the  world 
began,  but  how  it  is,  and  %{:lmi  it  is.  Are  these  atoms 
and  forces  an  ultimate  fact,  or  do  they  represent 
something  behind  ?  Is  not  their  existence  founded  on 
something  underlying,  which  is  their  cause  in  the 
same  sort  of  way  as  the  thinking  mind  is  the  cause  of 
thought  ?  It  is  acknowledged  that  material  science 
tells  us  nothing  about  things  in  themselves,  but  only 
about  our  impressions  of  the  things.  Is  there  any 
reason  to  suppose  that  the  things  themselves  have  any 
real  existence,  except  by  virtue  of  relation  to  intel- 
ligence ?  Even  apart  from  the  consideration  of  the 
character  of  the  world  Ave  live  in,  its  very  existence 
gives  us  metaphysical  reason  to  discern  with  confidence 
a  Mind  beneath  it. 

But,  if  it  cannot  as  yet  be  said  to  have  been 
scientifically  established  that  our  world  had  a  temporal 
bemiTninof,  it  cannot  be  denicjd  that  there  are  facts 
which  point  very  convincingly  in  that  direction.  The 
investigations  of  Sir  William  Thomson,  Professor  Clerk 
Maxwell,  and  otliers,  with  regard  to  wliat  is  called  the 


Evidences  of  a  temporal  Origin  in  Nahire,  9 


Degradation  o£  Energy,  tend  to  show  that  the  universe, 
even  in  the  most  elementary  condition  which  science 
leads  us  to  conceive  of,  had  a  beginning,  and  that  it 
must  have  an  end.  "  The  theory  of  heat,"  it  has  been 
said,  and  the  assertion  has  hardly  been  challenged, 
"places  us  in  the  dilemma  either  of  believing  in 
creation  in  an  assignable  date  in  the  past,  or  else  of 
supposing  that  some  unexplicable  change  in  the  work- 
ing of  natural  laws  then  took  place."  Even  the  very 
molecules  of  which  the  world  is  composed  bear  the 
strongest  evidence  that  they  are  not  eternal  and  self- 
existent.  In  the  well-known  words  of  Sir  John 
Herschel,  each  molecule  has  the  essential  character 
of  a  manufactured  article."  Professor  Clerk  Maxwell, 
in  quoting  these  words,  adds,  "In  tracing  back  the 
history  of  matter,  science  is  arrested  when  she  assures 
herself,  on  the  one  hand,  that  the  molecule  has  been 
made,  and  on  the  other,  that  it  has  not  been  made  by 
any  of  the  processes  we  call  natural."  Before  ever  we 
begin  to  consider  what  has  been  made  out  of  the 
elements,  the  elements  themselves — the  atoms  which 
compose  material  objects,  and  the  forces  which  act 
upon  them — make  us  feel  that  they  owe  their  origin 
to  Another,  and  say,  "  It  is  He  that  hath  made  us,  and 
not  we  ourselves  "  (Ps.  c.  2). 

This  feeling  is  much  strengthened  when  we  turn 
to  the  phenomena  of  Life.  Supposing  that  the  whole 
fabric  of  inorganic  matter,  with  its  wonders  of 
light  and  heat  and  electricity,  with  its  planetary 
systems,  with  the  beauties  of  water,  air,  and  earth, 
were  the  result  of  an  accidental  play  of  self -existent 


lo    Argument  from  Phenomena  of  Life, 


atoms,  yet  life,  so  far  as  we  can  see,  cannot  be  accounted 
for  in  the  same  way.  It  is  as  nearly  certain  as  any- 
thing can  be  that  the  conditions  of  matter  were  at  one 
time  such — the  solar  system  consisting  of  gases  at  a 
white  heat — that  no  kind  of  organic  life  such  as  we 
are  acquainted  with  was  possible  in  it.  Organic  life, 
then,  has  had  a  beginning  in  the  world,  even  if  matter 
and  force  have  not.  How  did  it  begin  ?  Experimental 
evidence  cannot  establish  a  negative ;  but  the  re- 
searches of  men  unprejudiced  and  competent  confirm 
us  in  supposing  that  there  is  no  such  thing  as  spon- 
taneous generation.  Science  knows  of  no  life  which 
had  not  a  living  parent ;  and  science  teaches  that  once 
there  were  no  living  parents  on  earth  to  produce  a 
life.  Yet  here  life  is.  The  chasm  between  the  noblest 
form  of  inorganic  being  and  the  lowest  form  of  organic 
— a  crystal,  for  instance,  and  a  cell  of  protoplasm — is 
so  great  that  no  connecting  link  can  be  found.  So  far 
as  we  see,  no  evolution  works  gradually  up  to  life. 
It  is  a  sudden,  startling  phenomenon,  which  uses 
matter  and  force  for  its  own  purposes,  but  which  is 
not  derived  from  them.  Whence  was  the  first  life 
introduced  into  a  world  which  had  once  been  incapable , 
of  harbouring  it,  and  which  seems  for  ever  incapable 
of  producing  it  ?  There  seems  to  be  but  one  answer. 
If,  indeed,  it  should  hereafter  be  discovered  that 
spontaneous  generations  take  place,  or  that  the  pro- 
duction of  life  Avas  a  purely  natural  outcome  of  the 
conditions  of  the  universe  at  one  stage  of  its  history, 
tlie  Clu'istian  will  not  be  at  a  loss.  But  in  the  present 
state  of  our  knowledge  the  presence  ot  life  in  a  world 


Argument  from  Self -Consciousness.      1 1 


where  once  there  was  no  life  appears  to  proclaim 
unmistakeably  the  existence  of  a  Lifegiver. 

Furthermore,  since  the  introduction  of  sentient 
life  into  the  world,  yet  another  factor  has  made  its 
appearance,  in  human  Self-consciousness.  The  bodily 
constitution  of  man  may  without  difficulty  be  supposed 
to  have  been  evolved  out  of  lower  forms  of  organic 
life ;  but  no  evolution,  no  culture,  so  far  as  can  be  as- 
certained, is  able  to  put  even  into  the  highest  animals 
the  human  power  of  reflexion.  The  acuteness,  the 
intelligence,  the  memory,  of  an  animal  never  rise  any 
nearer  to  it.  However  highly  developed,  they  form 
but  the  ground  material,  so  to  speak,  out  of  which 
our  human  self-consciousness  constructs  itself  a  home, 
just  as  life  constructs  for  itself  a  home  out  of  particles 
of  matter.  To  many  thinkers,  even  the  distance  be- 
tween inorganic  and  organic  existence  appears  not  so 
wide  and  impassable  as  that  between  merely  sentient 
and  truly  conscious  life.  Where,  then,  are  we  to  look 
for  that  power  which  laid  hold  upon  the  highest  of 
animal  forms,  and,  by  adding  the  gift  of  self -con- 
sciousness, first  made  of  it  a  man  ?  Once  more  we 
repeat,  that  if  it  can  be  shown  that  the  human  mind 
is  only  a  development  from  the  analogous  faculties 
found  in  other  animals,  the  Christian,  so  far  from 
being  staggered,  will  only  find  fresh  matter  for 
adoring  the  wisdom  and  power  of  God.  But,  so  far 
as  we  can  at  present  judge,  the  only  reasonable  way 
of  accounting  for  the  genesis  of  the  human  mind  is  to 
suppose  a  Mind  which  created  it. 

Thus  the   history  of  successive  stages  of  the 


12      Argument  from  Order  in  Naitar. 


course  of  the  natural  world,  so  far  as  it  is  set  before 
us  by  science,  seems  to  indicate  clearly  some  principle 
of  causation,  acting  upon  the  world,  without  belonging 
to  the  world  itself.  Three  great  beginnings  present 
themselves  to  view, — a  Ijeginning  of  matter,  a  begin- 
ning of  life,  a  beginning  of  mind.  None  of  these  is 
shown  to  liave  led  on  to  the  next  as  to  a  purely 
natural  consequence ;  j-et,  when  matter  was  ready  for 
the  reception  of  life,  and  life  for  the  reception  of  free 
consciousness,  life  and  consciousness  came.  We  are 
drawn,  therefore,  to  conclude  that  at  these  points  a 
directly  creative  agency  was  at  work. 

And  not  only  so.  We  conclude  at  least  as 
strongly  that  that  creative  agenc}^  had  a  deliberate 
design  in  its  operations.  The  more  closely  we  examine 
the  evidence  of  nature,  the  more  it  appears  that  this 
preparation  of  the  world  for  its  successive  enrich- 
ments was  intentional  and  intelligent.  If  some 
imaginable  universe  might  have  existed  without  a 
Creator,  we  feel  that  the  universe  with  which  we  are 
acquainted  could  not.  This  is  not  only  the  sentiment 
of  unscientific  piety.  Every  year  new  facts  are  dis- 
covered which  impress  the  mind  more  and  more  with 
the  sense  of  law  in  the  world ;  and  although,  if  we 
were  certain  that  there  was  no  God,  we  might  resign 
ourselves  wonderingly  to  the  conclusion  that  it  was  a 
property  self-existing  in  the  verj^  nature  of  things,  it 
seems  far  simpler  to  believe  that  the  law  indicates  the 
presence  of  guiding  thought.  Blind  forces  acting  at 
random  upon  lifeless  matter  could  not  possibh" — or 
at  least  the  odds  against  it  are  infinitely  great — have 


Conclusion  from  the  Evidence  of  Naiure.  13 


reduced  chaos  to  cosmos,  and  produced  regularity,  order, 
unity,  beauty,  and  so  arranged  the  whole  system  and 
hierarchy  of  existences,  as  (with  some  apparent  excep- 
tions) to  subserve  the  well-being  and  happiness  of 
each.  To  many  minds  the  idea  of  Evolution,  which  in 
our  time  has  made  such  way,  so  far  from  militating 
against  the  belief  in  a  Creator,  is  entirely  in  favour 
of  that  belief.  It  lends  itself  perfectly  to  Christian 
teleology,  or  the  thought  of  a  purpose  to  which  things 
are  directed.  An  evolution  which  aims  at  nothing  in 
particular,  or  which  goes  from  better  to  worse,  would 
be  against  the  Christian  belief ;  but  when  we  hear  of 
an  evolution  which  is  an  advance  from  a  ruder 
economy  to  a  more  delicate,  which  adapts  things  more 
and  more  to  their  surroundings,  and  the  surroundings 
to  the  things,  then  it  seems  to  us  that  matter  and 
force,  and  life,  and  self -consciousness  itself,  must  be 
instruments  in  the  hands  of  One  who  has  an  object 
in  view. 

It  seems  impossible  candidly  to  reflect  upon  these 
successive  steps  in  the  history  of  nature  and  to 
examine  in  detail  the  mutual  adaptation  of  the  parts 
of  this  great  whole,  especially  in  the  animal  and 
vegetable  kingdoms,  without  coming  to  the  conclusion 
that  there  is  a  wise  and  mighty  Will  behind  it  all. 
John  Stuart  Mill  was  not  a  man  who  held  a  brief  for 
Christianity,  and  few  men  have  felt  so  bitterly  as  he 
did  the  defects  and  cruelties  of  nature ;  yet  in  his  last 
posthumous  essay,  On  Theism,"  he  sums  up  his  cold 
investigation  of  the  argument  from  the  appearances 
of  design  by  saying,  "  I  think  it  must  be  allowed  that 


14  Evidence  of  Hiijuan  Ideals. 


in  the  present  state  of  our  knowledge,  the  adaptations 
in  nature  afford  a  large  balance  of  probability  in 
favour  of  creation  by  intelligence/' 

§-^- 

The  Imlance  of  probability  Ijecomes  gi-eater  when 
wc  add  tlie  e\  idence  supplied  by  our  mental  and 
moral  C(jnstituti(jn.  It  is  difficult,  indeed,  to  throw 
this  argument  into  a  form  as  popular  as  the  argument 
from  the  adaptations  in  nature ;  for  the  ordinary 
mind  is  not  accustomed  to  follow  trains  of  abstract 
tliought.  It  may  suffice  for  our  present  purpose  to 
ask  how  the  idea  of  God,  as  hcM  by  an  enlightened 
Christian,  was  ever  formed.  Man's  power  of  mental 
creation  is  very  limited.  He  can  only  construct  out 
of  materials  which  come  to  hand.  He  can  coml)inc 
elements  with  which  he  is  acquainted  into  imaginary 
forms,  but  he  cannot  for  instance,  in  any  practical 
way,  conceive  of  a  fourth  dimension,  an  additional 
sense,  or  a  new  colour.  But  man  has  ideals,  which 
transcend  all  experience,  although  suggested  by  it. 
The  finite  leads  him  up  to  the  infinite,  the  imperfect 
to  the  perfect.  His  circumscribed  powers  make  him 
uneasy  without  the  thought  of  a  power  not  circum- 
scribed. His  fragmentary  knowledge  makes  him 
demand  the  existence  of  a  mind  to  which  the  sum  of 
truth  is  present.  The  artist  is  unsatisfied  by  his 
highest  efforts ;  the  perfection  of  beauty  lies  im- 
measurably beyond  him.  And  this  ideal,  this  infinite 
perfection,  is  not  man's  creation.  He  has  not  made  it 
each  man  does  not  make  it — for  hinivself.    He  feels 


Testimony  of  Moral  Conscience.  15 


that  it  is  there.  He  is  but  striving  to  apprehend  a 
reality.  He  cannot  think  of  himself  as  inventing  the 
very  material  of  his  thought ;  he  is  moving  on  solid 
ground,  through  regions  prepared  for  him  before  he 
came  thither,  and  dimly  descries  still  fairer  regions 
beyond,  to  which  he  aspires  to  penetrate.  The  only 
way  to  account  satisfactorily  for  our  idea  of  the 
perfect  Being  after  whom  we  aspire  is  to  believe  that 
He  is,  and  that  men,  by  virtue  of  kinship  with  Him, 
catch  glimpses  of  Him. 

And  this  observation  holds  true,  above  all,  in  the 
domain  of  morals.  A  man's  sense  of  right  and  wrong 
may  become  depraved,  like  his  sense  of  beauty ;  but 
when  men  are  in  a  fairly  healthy  condition  of  con- 
science, there  is  a  moral  ideal,  practically  the  same  for 
all,  which  they  acknowledge  when  it  is  shown  to 
them.  This  moral  ideal  lays  hold  upon  them.  Con- 
science evidently  speaks,  not  of  itself,  but  of  something 
else  whose  authority  it  recognises.  To  that  moral 
ideal  men  find  themselves  under  an  unique  obligation. 
They  feel  an  awed  sense  of  responsibility  towards  it. 
They  are  uncomfortable  when  they  have  neglected  it. 
Men  will  think  little  of  a  slip  in  grammar,  a  lack  of 
artistic  perfection;  but  they  will  not  lightly  trifle 
with  their  conscience.  And  when  they  make  any 
approaches  to  the  moral  ideal,  they  are  conscious  that 
they  are  not  creating  the  ideal  which  they  approach, 
but  that  their  action  corresponds  to  something*  which 
actually  is ;  to  use  the  language  of  Scripture,  they  are 
"  doing  the  truth."  Intuitively  they  demand  that  the 
moral  law,  which  asserts  its  mastery  over  themselves, 


1 6        Universaliiy  of  the  Moral  Law. 


should  assert  an  universal  mastery,  and  form  part  of 
the  very  constitution  of  things.  While  obedience  to 
it  conduces  both  to  the  happiness  of  the  world  in 
general  and  to  an  enlightened  self-interest,  conscience 
is  not  satisfied  to  consider  the  moral  law  as  a  set  of 
rules  which  human  prudence  has  collected  with  a 
view  to  such  ends.  All  attempts  to  make  it  univer- 
sally binding  break  down  when  any  other  ethical 
basis  is  taken  instead  of  that  which  makes  right  to 
be  necessarily  right,  and  the  whole  world  to  be  framed 
with  a  view  to  it.  And  as  men  labour  more  earnestly 
to  attain  in  their  own  lives  to  moral  perfection,  which 
ever  seems  further  from  them  as  they  near  it,  they 
see  with  increasing  clearness  that  it  is  impossible  to 
separate  the  ideal  of  sanctity  from  the  ideal  of  beauty, 
the  ideal  of  knowledge,  the  ideal  of  power ;  and  they 
feel  that  it  is  no  idolatry,  no  worship  of  the  work  of 
their  own  hands  or  of  the  fiction  of  their  own  brains, 
when  they  fall  down  before  this  Ideal  of  all  perfec- 
tions, and  say,  "  Holy,  holy,  holy.  Lord  God  Almighty 
which  waSj  and  is,  and  is  to  corned 

§  6. 

Revelation  corroborates  and  completes  the  evidence 
borne  by  nature  and  the  mind  of  man.  If  we  Jiad  no 
grounds  apart  from  revelation  for  thinking  tliat  God 
is,  there  would  have  been  much  reason  for  suspecting 
the  revelation.  But  ''the  sender  of  the  alleged 
message,''  says  John  Stuart  Mill  in  the  essay  to  which 
we  have  before  referred,  "  is  not  a  sheer  invention ; 
there  are  grounds  independent  of  the  message  itself 


Testhnony  of  History,  1 7 


for  belief  in  his  reality — grounds  which,  though 
insufficient  for  proof,  are  sufficient  to  take  away  all 
antecedent  improbability  from  the  supposition  that  a 
message  may  really  have  been  received  from  him." 
Nay,  we  may  say,  there  is  a  strong  antecedent  prob- 
ability in  behalf  of  revelation.  It  would  surprise  us 
if  such  a  Creator  as  we  infer  from  the  phenomena  of 
the  world  and  man  had  not  wished  to  be  known  by 
His  intelligent  creation.  And  the  Church  maintains 
a  standing  witness  that,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  the 
Creator  has  made  Himself  known  to  her.  She  affirms 
that  she  was  gradually  prepared  for  the  final  and 
complete  revelation  by  an  advancing  series  of  pre- 
liminary revelations,  in  many  parts  and  in  many 
manners  "  receiving  from  time  to  time,  as  the  progress 
of  her  education  enabled  her  to  bear  it,  more  and  more 
of  the  Divine  communication.  Few  arguments  for  the 
belief  in  God  are  more  convincing  than  those  derived 
from  a  study  of  human  history,  with  its  plain  traces 
of  moral  training  and  providential  discipline,  whether 
we  consider  the  experience  of  individual  lives,  or  the 
fashioning  of  the  race  for  that  which  it  was  to  receive. 
At  last,  the  life  of  Godhead  actually  presented  itself 
to  the  sight,  and  hearing,  and  touch  of  men,  under  the 
conditions  of  the  life  of  man.  That  J esus  Christ  really 
lived  and  died  is  doubted  by  none.  The  historical 
consequences  which  have  flowed  from  that  life  and 
death  are  open  for  all  to  examine.  And  the  more 
rigorous  the  examination  is,  the  more  it  appears  that 
the  account  of  Jesus  Christ  given  by  the  Church  is 
rational  and  straightforward,  and  alone  consistent 

C 


1 8    Faith  more  profitable  than  Demonstration. 


with  all  the  facts.  This  carries  us,  however,  some- 
what beyond  our  present  subject;  for  the  account  of 
Jesus  Christ  given  by  the  Church  is  that  He  was 
Himself  God  Incarnate.  But  even  if,  for  the  moment, 
we  leave  the  question  of  our  Lord's  own  proper 
Divinity,  we  may  truly  say  that  the  life  and  work  of 
Christ  are  inexplicable,  are  impossible,  if  the  God  from 
whom  He  professed  to  come  had  no  existence.  Taken 
in  conjunction  with  the  strong  cumulative  evidence 
derived  from  elsewhere,  the  phenomena  presented  by 
the  history  of  J esus  Christ  and  of  the  Church  may  be 
said — not  indeed  in  the  logical,  but  in  the  judicial, 
sense — to  prove  that  God  is. 

§  7. 

If  any  one  finds  it  to  be  a  stumbling-block  that 
proof  in  the  stricter  sense  is  still  wanting,  it  is  easy 
to  reply  that  there  are  many  other  things  of  which 
we  are  certain,  though  they  lie  beyond  strict  proof. 
Can  we  prove  to  demonstration  that  such  a  man  as 
Caesar  ever  lived  ?  Can  we  prove  that  the  world 
round  us  is  not  a  dream  of  ovir  own  ?  or  that  motion  is 
a  reality  ?  or  even  that  we  ourselves  are  in  existence  ? 
The  famous  solvitur  amhidando  of  Diogenes,  and  the 
famous  cogitOy  ergo  sum  of  Descartes,  are  appeals 
from  the  tyranny  of  a  sophistical  logic  to  tlie  good 
sense  of  mankind.  In  like  manner,  God  has  not  made 
Himself  the  subject  of  prying  experiments  or  of 
pedantic  syllogisms.  Perhaps,  if  His  existence  had 
been  one  of  tliose  things  of  which  formal  proof  could 


The  Belief  verified  by  Experience,       1 9 


be  given  to  the  world,  the  acknowledged  fact  would 
have  lost  its  interest.  It  would  have  killed  indi- 
vidual inquiry.  Few  men  would  have  cared  to 
verify  what  no  one  would  dispute.  The  tendency 
would  have  been  to  rest  upon  an  intellectual  assent  to 
the  proposition.  When  it  came  to  the  proof,  the  poor 
and  simple  would  have  been  at  too  great  a  disadvan- 
tage compared  with  the  philosopher.  We  should  have 
lost  all  those  touching  and  noble  associations  which 
gather  round  the  name  of  faith,  and  should  have  had 
instead  a  cold  science — common  property,  and  so 
appropriated  by  none.  As  it  is,  each  man  has  to 
prove  the  fact  for  himself.  It  is  the  great  adventure, 
the  great  romance  of  every  soul — this  finding  of  God. 
Though  so  many  travellers  have  crossed  the  ocean 
before  us,  and  bear  witness  of  the  glorious  continent 
beyond,  each  soul  for  itself  has  to  repeat  the  work  of 
a  Columbus,  and  discover  God  afresh.  And  this  can 
indeed  be  done ;  but  intellectual  argument  is  not  the 
sole  nor  the  main  means  of  apprehension.  At  best  it 
prepares  the  way.  Moral  purification  is  equally 
necessary.  Then  spiritual  efibrt,  determined,  con- 
centrated, renewed  in  spite  of  failure — calm  and 
strong  prayers  in  the  Name  of  Christ — enable  the 
believer  to  say,  like  Jacob  after  he  had  wrestled  with 
the  Angel,  "  I  have  seen  God  face  to  face,  and  my  life 
is  preserved."  And  every  soul  which  has  thus  proved 
for  itself,  by  an  unmistakeable  experience,  the  exist- 
ence of  God,  goes  to  swell  the  ever-increasing  weight 
of  testimony  which  draws  other  men  to  believe.  He 
is  added  to  the  number  of  those  who  testify  that  God 


20  Spirihtality  of  God's  N'ahire. 


has  not  only  revealed  Himself  in  the  past,  but  that 
He  is  still  accessible  to  all  who  approach  Him  rightly. 

§  8- 

Emerging  from  the  dim  region  of  human  guess- 
^York  into  the  light  of  an  accepted  revelation,  we 
desire  to  understand,  by  the  teaching  w^hich  God  has 
given  us,  what  He  is  and  what  He  is  like.  The 
nature  of  God  is  briefly  stated  by  our  Lord,  when  He 
says  to  the  woman  of  Samaria,  "God  is  spirit"  (S. 
John  iv.  24).  His  meaning  is  somewhat  obscured  in 
the  English  Bible.  To  say  that  ''God  is  a  spirit" 
mioht  mean  that  He  belono^s  to  a  class,  that  He  is  a 
specimen  of  an  order  comprising  other  beings  besides 
Himself.  Our  Lord's  Avords — Trvev/Lia  6  Qeog — make 
no  such  suggestion.  They  do  not  assign  God  to  a 
class,  but  simply  describe  what  His  nature  is — as,  in 
the  previous  chapter,  our  Lord  had  said  to  Nicodemus, 
That  which  is  born  of  the  Spirit  is  spirit : "  or  as,  in 
a  later  one,  He  says  to  His  disciples,  "The  sayings 
which  I  have  spoken  unto  you  are  spirit "  (S.  John  iii. 
6 ;  vi.  63).  Energetic  life  forms  part  of  the  notion 
which  the  word  conveys;  but,  beyond  that,  we  can 
best  understand  it  by  negatives.  God  is  not  flesli. 
There  is  nothing  material  about  Him.  The  finest  and 
most  subtle  of  ethereal  substances,  such  as  some  have 
supposed  to  invest  even  angels  and  disembodied  spirits, 
is  as  alien  from  His  nature  as  the  coarsest.  Not  only 
has  He  no  "  shape "  or  bodily  outline,  which  men 
might  conceivably  sec  (S.  John  v.  37),  but  He  lias  no 
extension  in  spaeo  at  all,  and  bears  do  local  relation  to 


His  Absolute  Existence, 


21 


anything.  Hence  it  is  that  neither  at  Jerusalem  nor 
on  the  Samaritan  mountain  could  men  find  Him  by- 
being  (so  to  speak)  on  the  same  spot  with  Him.  If 
they  were  to  find  Him  there  or  elsewhere  it  must  be 
by  a  purely  inward  movement.  God  is  spirit ;  and 
they  that  worship  Him  must  worship  Him  in  spirit 
and  in  truth." 

There  are,  indeed,  other  spirits  besides  God,  which 
may,  therefore,  be  said  in  a  sense  to  belong  to  tlie 
same  class  of  beings  with  Him,  inasmuch  as,  like  Him, 
they  are  immaterial.  But  there  is  this  fundamental 
diflference  between  God  and  all  other  beings,  even 
those  whose  nature  is  most  like  to  His — they  have  an 
origin ;  and  that  origin  is  not  from  themselves ; 
mediately  or  immediately  it  proceeds  from  Him,  and 
they  depend  always  upon  Him.  But  God,  on  the 
other  hand,  has  no  origin,  and  depends  upon  nothing 
else.  He  eternally  is.  His  existence  is  the  final  and 
necessary  fact  upon  which  all  other  facts  repose.  The 
mystery  of  being  is  beyond  our  thought ;  and  we  do 
not  deny  the  reality  of  other  existences  when  we  say 
that  God  alone  is ;  Ave  only  assert  that  their  being 
is  of  an  altogether  different  kind  from  His.  Other 
things  have  a  true,  but  only  a  contingent,  being ;  but 
God  is,  because  He  is,  and  for  no  other  reason.  No 
other  will  but  His  own  contributes  to  His  existence ; 
and  He  Himself  cannot  choose  otherwise  than  to  be. 
Our  springs  of  life  are  in  Him  ;  but  His  are  nowhere 
but  in  the  depths  of  His  own  being.     This  is  the 


22 


God  tncomprekensible 


meaning  of  the  revelation  made  to  Moses  at  the  Bush 
(Ex.  iii.  14).  We  have  not  exhausted  the  significance  of 
the  name  I  Am  "  when  we  say  that  it  denotes  God's 
attributes  of  eternity,  of  having  neither  beginning 
nor  end,  of  unchangeableness.  All  these  are  natural 
consequences  from  the  name  I  Am,"  but  the  name 
itself  contains  a  positive,  not  a  negative,  thought.  It 
expresses  God's  absolute  existence.  While  cutting  at 
the  root  of  every  pantheistic  conception,  by  declaring 
the  independent,  personal  self-consciousness  of  God, 
it  teaches  the  infinite  fulness  of  life  which  God  has 
within  His  own  being. 

§10. 

Before  drawing  nearer  to  consider  the  attributes 
and  character  of  God,  it  is  wholesome  to  remind  our- 
selves how  imperfect  must  necessarily  be  any  human 
setting  forth  of  the  subject.  Words  fail  us  in 
attempting  to  describe  even  what  we  are  able  to 
perceive ;  and  what  we  are  able  to  perceive  concerning 
God  falls  immeasurably  short  of  the  truth.  We  cannot 
fully  realise  even  what  things  are  which  come  closely 
under  our  external  observation,  and  whose  nature  is 
more  limited  than  our  OAvn.  "You  do  not  under- 
stand," says  S.  Basil,  "  the  nature  of  the  smallest  ant, 
and  how  can  you  boast  that  you  can  depict  to  yourself 
the  inconceivable  power  of  God  ? "  No  definition,  no 
description  of  God  can  be  given ;  because  no  creaturcly 
Hitelligcncc  can  form  any  adequate  conception  of  Him. 
God  is  incompreliensiljle.  Wlicn,  indeed,  He  is  so 
called  in  our  version  of  the  Athanasian  syml)ol,  tlie 


yei  not  zvholly  ttnknowable.  23 


term  is  used  to  express  a  somewhat  different  thought : 
— it  there  represents  the  Latin  immensits,  which  is 
generally  taken  to  mean  that  God  is  not  bounded  by- 
measures  of  space.  But  He  is  also  incomprehensible 
in  the  larger  meaning  o£  the  word,  as  transcending  all 
imaginations  and  thoughts  of  Him  which  can  be 
entertained  or  framed.  However  noble  the  powers 
with  which  He  has  endowed  us,  they  cannot  take 
Him  in.  "  Canst  thou  by  searching  find  out  God  ? 
Canst  thou  find  out  the  Almighty  unto  perfection  ? 
It  is  high  as  heaven  ;  what  canst  thou  do  ?  deeper 
than  hell;  what  canst  thou  know  ?"  (Job  xi.  7,  8). 

And  yet  the  incomprehensibleness  of  God  must  not 
be  so  interpreted  as  to  mean  that  God  is  altogether 
unintelligible  to  man,  and  that  we  have  no  powers  by 
which  truly  to  know  Him.  It  is  not  even  the  case 
that  revelation  (in  the  technical  sense)  was  necessary 
before  man  could  know  God  at  all ; — had  it  been  so, 
then  no  revelation  could  have  been  made.  If  man's 
natural  faculties  were  incapable  of  any  real  appre- 
hension of  God's  attributes  and  character,  it  would 
have  been  in  vain  to  send  him  any  message  about 
God,  for  the  message  would  have  found  in  him 
nothing  to  which  it  could  address  itself.  S.  Irenaeus, 
arguing  against  some  teachers  of  his  time,  who  mis- 
quoted Christ's  saying  that  the  Father  was  unknown 
except  through  the  revelation  of  the  Son,  says,  The 
Lord  did  not  say  that  the  Father  and  the  Son  could 
not  be  known  at  all.  In  that  case  His  own  coming 
would  have  been  useless.  For  why  did  He  come 
hither  ?    Was  it  to  say  to  us,  '  Do  not  seek  after  God ; 


24         Otir  Power  of  knowing  God, 


for  He  is  unknown,  and  you  will  not  find  Him  ? '  " 
From  that  earliest  Gospel  (as  it  has  been  called) 
which  proclaims  that  man  was  made  in  God's  image, 
to  the  end  of  the  Bible,  both  Testaments  teach  that  to 
know  God  is  our  very  life,  and  the  thing  for  which 
we  were  created.  Our  knowledge  of  Him,  whether 
by  nature  or  by  grace,  can  never  attain  to  being  an 
exhaustive  knowledge,  but  it  can  be  a  true  one  never- 
theless, and  a  glorious  and  satisfying  one.  When  we 
learn  that  God  has  intelligence  and  will,  that  He  is 
just  and  tender-hearted,  the  words  are  not  mere  symbols 
for  something  that  we  cannot  understand:  they  de- 
scribe the  actual  facts,  which  we  can  in  some  degree 
appreciate  because  we  share  those  faculties  and  try  to 
practise  those  virtues.  We  cannot,  assuredly,  under- 
stand the  inner  conditions  of  the  Divine  life  and  action 
— liow  God  thinks,  and  feels,  and  wills.  Theologians 
are  careful  to  teach  that  the  perfections  of  God  are 
not  found  in  Him  in  the  identical  way  in  which  the 
like  are  found  in  the  creatures  ;  but  none  the  less  the 
perfections  which  we  are  taught  to  adore  in  Him  have 
their  adumbrations  and  copies  in  us,  by  virtue  of 
which,  limited  as  they  are,  we  are  enabled  to  appre- 
hend Him  with  an  ever-advancing  clearness  and  rich- 
ness of  apprehension, 

%  11- 

God  is  revealed  to  us  as  being  One.  Hear,  O 
Israel ;  the  Lord  our  God  is  one  Lord  "  (Deut.  vi.  4). 
When  God  is  declared  in  Scripture  to  be  One,  tlie 
object  is  not  usually  to  warn  us  from  polytheism  and 


His  Unity. 


25 


teach  us  monotheism  instead.  Moses  does  not  say, 
^^The  Lord  thy  God  is  the  One— the  only— Lord/' 
That  truth  is  indeed  often  expressed  in  the  Bible. 

Is  there  a  God  besides  Me  ?  yea,  there  is  no  God ; 
I  know  not  any  (Isa.  xliv.  8).  But  (usually,  at  least) 
the  unity  of  God  set  before  us  is  not  numerical,  deny- 
ing the  existence  of  a  second ;  it  is  integral,  denj  ing 
the  possibility  of  division.  God  is  not  made  up  out 
of  a  number  of  elements  into  which  He  might  be 
resolved  again.  The  Schoolmen  were  accustomed  to 
speak  of  Him  as  "  pure  act,"  because  they  would  not 
even  allow  of  a  difference  in  God  between  what  is 
potential  and  what  is  actual, — between  what  God 
might  do  and  what  He  does.  His  attributes, — the 
adjectives  by  which  He  is  set  forth  to  us, — do  not 
represent  qualities  which  He  might  conceivably  be 
Avithout :  they  are  Himself.  His  perfections  are  His 
very  being.  Nor  are  His  perfections  in  reality  diverse 
from  each  other.  Although  they  necessarily  represent 
different  notions  to  our  finite  thought,  they  are  in  Him 
finally  and  fundamentally  the  same.  God  has  no 
parts.  "  If  it  were  so,"  said  one  of  the  prophet-like 
philosophers  of  early  Greece,  "then  the  component 
elements  would  sometimes  get  the  better  of  each  other 
and  sometimes  the  worse ;  and  that,  in  one  who  is  God, 
is  impossible."  There  can  be  no  conflict  within  Him, 
such  as  there  is  in  us  between  flesh  and  spirit.  He 
cannot  be  at  cross-purposes  with  Himself.  He  is  not 
moved,  as  we  are,  by  incompatible  impulses.  In  His 
singleness  of  nature  there  is  not  one  set  of  feelings 
prompting  Him  to  work  and  another  to  rest,  one  to 


26  His  Omniscience, 


punish  and  another  to  spare,  one  to  remember  and 
another  to  forget.  However  infinite  the  variety  of 
His  action,  it  is  but  the  manifestation,  in  varying 
circumstances,  of  one  and  the  self-same  character  and 
will.  And  in  everything  which  He  does,  or  thinks,  or 
wills,  God  is  Avholly  engaged.  His  consciousness  is 
undivided,  and  is  entirely  present  at  every  point  of 
His  working, 

§12. 

For  the  unity  of  God  is  not  the  unity  of  a  limited 
Being.  God  is  infinite.  In  its  negative  sense,  His 
infinity  implies  that  the  bounds  which  confine  us  do 
not  confine  Him,  whether  in  respect  of  knowledge  or 
of  power,  of  space  or  time.  In  its  positive  sense,  in- 
finity indicates  that  God  possesses  every  perfection  in 
its  complete  and  absolute  fulness,  so  as  to  contain 
exhaustively  all  that  belongs  to  the  conception  of 
those  perfections. 

The  infinity  of  God's  knowledge  we  express  by  the 
word  "omniscient."  By  that  word  we  do  not  mean 
only  that  God  can,  if  He  chooses,  find  everything  out, 
that  nothing  can  ultimately  be  hidden  from  Hhn,  that 
He  has  all  departments  of  knowledge  open  to  Him 
when  He  is  pleased  to  turn  to  them.  We  mean  that 
all  objects  of  knowledge  and  thought  are  at  all  times 
actually  present  to  His  consciousness.  Nothing  is  too 
minute  for  Him  to  be  observant  of.  The  humblest 
forms  of  life  arc  under  His  eye,  even  after  tlicy  liavc 
passed  away  from  their  earthly  exhibition.  Are  not 
five  sparrows  sold  for  tw()  farthings  ?  and  not  one  of 


His  Omniscience  and  Omnipresence,     2  J 


the  five  (imXeXtifTjuevov  eaTiv)  Iifus  vanished  from  the 
mind  of  God.  Behold;'  adds  our  Lord,  "  the  very 
hairs  of  your  head  are  all  numbered  "  (S.  Luke  xii. 
6,  7).  The  laws  which  regulate  so  minutely  all  energy 
and  matter,  are  but  ways  of  stating  this  truth  as 
observed  by  our  experience  :  every  particle,  molecule, 
atom,  represents  a  thought  of  God,  and  continues  to 
exist  because  He  is  still  thinking  it.  His  knowledge 
is  exact  and  searching  to  the  uttermost. 

But  the  omniscience  of  God  does  not  consist  in 
an  exhaustive  perception  of  ever  so  many  separate 
things.  Were  this  so,  creation  would  never  be  any- 
thing but  a  confusion ;  there  would  be  no  unity  nor 
order  in  it.  God's  loiowledge  is  not  analytical  only  ; 
it  is  at  the  same  time  in  the  highest  degree  syn- 
thetic. God  does  not  become  lost  and  bewildered 
in  a  multiplicity  of  details.  His  unity  enables  Him 
to  see  all  things  that  are  or  can  be,  in  all  their  relations 
to  each  other,  actual  or  possible.  Being  Himself  One 
and  at  the  same  time  infinite,  He  has  before  Him 
for  ever  all  things  and  thoughts  in  every  conceivable 
combination  of  beauty  and  wisdom.  It  is  not  neces- 
sary for  Him,  as  for  us,  to  turn  His  attention  from 
one  subject  in  order  to  fix  it  upon  another,  nor  to  run 
His  eye  backwards  and  forwards  to  see  the  mutual 
bearings  of  the  various  parts  of  that  which  is.  This 
power  of  perfect  synthesis  makes  Him  what  the  Bible 
calls  Him,  "  the  only  wise  God  "  (Rom.  xvi.  27). 

Thus  God's  omniscience  is  very  closely  connected 
with  what  is  called  His  "  omnipresence."  That  word 
ought  not  to  be  taken  as  a  synonym  of  "  ubiquity,''  as 


28 


His  Presence 


if  God  were  in  an  immense  number  of  places  at  once. 
We  must  not  think  of  Him  as  diffused  universally 
everywhere  throughout  space,  a  portion  of  His  Being 
attaching  itself  to  every  object  in  existence.  To  put 
Him  in  any  place,  or  any  number  of  places  at  once, 
would  reduce  Him  to  being  of  the  same  nature  as  the 
things  among  which  He  would  be  placed.  God  is  not 
everywhere;  He  is  nowhere.  Rather  than  speak  of 
God  as  being  in  every  place,  we  should  say  that  every 
place  is  in  God, — that  all  existing  objects,  material  or 
immaterial  are  present  to  Him,  to  His  one  conscious- 
ness, are  in  His  mind,  in  immediate  contact  with  Him- 
self. It  is  to  this  spiritual,  as  distinct  from  physical 
or  local,  omnipresence  that  the  Psalmist  points  when 
he  says,  "  Whither  shall  I  go  from  Thy  Spirit  ?  or 
whither  shall  I  flee  from  Thy  presence  ?  If  I  ascend 
up  into  heaven,  Thou  art  there  :  if  I  make  my  bed  in 
hell,  behold,  Thou  art  there.  .  .  .  Yea,  the  darkness 
liideth  not  from  Thee ;  the  darkness  and  the  light 
to  Thee  are  both  alike''  (Ps.  cxxxix.  7,  foil.).  The 
presence  and  the  knowledge  of  God  are  treated  as 
identical. 

As,  however,  the  presence  of  God  is  not  merely  one 
of  knowledge,  but  of  operation  and  of  manifestation  also, 
tlicrefore  it  admits  of  degrees  of  nearness.  He  is  "  in 
all  tilings  "  (Eph.  iv.  6),  manifesting  Himself  by  every 
visible  thing  which  He  has  made,  so  that  the  believer 
moves  with  reverence  wherever  he  goes ;  but  He  is 
more  specially  present  in  particular  places  and  par- 
ticular acts,  in  wliicli  it  is  His  pleasure  to  manifest 
Himself  more  decisively,  so  that  the  believer  enters 


more  felt  in  some  Places. 


29 


those  places  and  engages  in  those  acts  with  an  access 
of  solemnity  and  awe.  It  is  a  favourite  thought  with 
the  Fathers  that  the  ''place"  of  God  was  the  Incarnate 
Son  ;  for  there,  in  and  through  a  bodily  organism,  was 
manifested  not  merely  (as  in  other  men)  a  measure  of 
God's  fulness,  such  as  observers  were  capable  of  appre- 
ciating, but  the  entire  sum  of  God's  being.  God  was 
in  Christ "  (2  Cor.  v.  19)  as  in  no  other  place.  And 
this  presence  of  manifestation  is  not  dependent  upon 
being  perceived.  God  is  in  all  things,  in  the  Church, 
in  Christ,  whether  men  recognise  it  or  not.  Irreve- 
rence and  unbelief  may  exclude  His  presence  sub- 
jectively from  themselves;  they  cannot  destroy  it 
objectively  out  of  the  things  and  acts  in  which  it 
chooses  to  appear. 

What  we  have  said  about  the  relations  between 
God's  omniscience  and  His  presence  in  space  may  be 
applied  also  to  His  presence  in  time.  He  is  not  in  His 
own  nature  subject  to  the  one  any  more  than  to  the 
other.  Space  and  time  alike  are  names  for  certain 
relations  in  which  finite  things,  by  His  appointment, 
stand  to  each  other;  God  Himself  transcends  them.  As 
God  is  not  a  being  who  pervades  all  places  by  local 
expansion,  so  neither  is  He  a  being  who  pervades  all 
ages  by  temporal  duration.  This  is  the  true  notion  of 
eternity.  Eternity  does  not  mean  only  a  series  of 
successive  moments  which  had  no  beginning  and  will 
have  no  end.  It  means  that  permanent  state  of  exist- 
ence which  is  independent  of  succession  altogether. 
The  words  ''  future  "  and  past "  only  become  realities 
for  God  in  His  dealing  with  creation.    And  indeed, 


30 


God's  Eternity. 


for  that  matter,  so  does  the  word  "present"  also; 
for,  as  God  is  not  to  be  conceived  of  as  located 
in  one  point  of  space,  commanding  all  other  space, 
which  to  Him  is  "  here,''  so  neither  is  He  to  be  con- 
ceived of  as  dating  at  one  point  of  time,  commanding 
all  other  time,  which  to  him  is  "  now/' 

Yet,  while  He  transcends  all  these  links  which  bind 
finite  things  together.  He  holds  them  all  clearly  and 
feelingly  in  His  one  infinite  intelligence.  It  is  impos- 
sible for  us  to  form  any  idea  how  temporal  succession 
may  look  from  the  standpoint  of  eternity  ;  but  we  may 
be  sure  that  it  is  seen  to  have  a  true  value.  If  time 
has  no  meaning  for  God,  it  is  an  illusion  for  us.  He 
enters  into  it,  and  sympathizes  with  those  creatures  of 
His  which  are  subject  to  it,  for  it  is  part  of  the  order- 
liness and  system  that  is  in  the  mind  of  God ;  and  in 
a  sense  He  subjects  Himself  to  it  by  creating  a  world 
in  which  it  finds  place.  It  is  a  law  which  He  has 
imposed,  not  upon  us  only,  but  upon  Himself  in  His 
dealings  with  us  ;  and  we  cannot  think  of  it  as  an 
arbitrary  law.  God  is  not  contemptuous  of  time. 
His  life  compared  with  ours  is  not  like  ours  compared 
with  that  of  some  ephemeral  insect.  To  the  insect 
tlic  interval  between  sunrise  and  sundown  might 
appear  as  long  as  threescore  years  and  ten  to  man. 
TIius  Moses  says,  A  thousand  years  in  Thy  sight  are 
]>ut  as  yesterday,"  as  if  the  vast  total  of  God's  Hfe 
diminished  the  significance  of  any  measurable  portion 
of  it.  But  tlie  fuller  thought  of  the  New  Testament 
brings  out  the  converse  side.  One  day  is  with  the 
Lord  as  a  tliousand  years  "  (Ps.  xc.  4  ;  S.  Pet.  iii.  S). 


His  Foreknowledge. 


31 


He  values  the  infinitesimal  in  time,  even  as  He  does  in 
space ;  and  thus  we  can  see  that  the  Bible  does  not 
use  an  unmeaning  metaphor  when  it  speaks  of  the 
patience,  the  long-suffering,  the  expectation  of  God. 

Two  main  inferences  may  be  drawn  from  this 
thought  of  God's  eternity.  The  first  is  that  the 
omniscience  of  God  extends  to  those  things  which  to 
us  are  still  future,  both  in  general  and  in  detail.  He 
uses  this  knowledge  as  a  testimony  to  His  sovereign 
Godhead,  when  He  foretells  to  men  that  which  will 
come  to  pass.  I  am  God,  and  there  is  none  like  Me, 
declaring  the  end  from  the  beginning,  and  from 
ancient  times  the  things  that  are  not  yet  done  "  (Isa. 
xlvi.  9).  From  the  point  of  view  of  absolute  eternity 
such  knowledge  cannot  strictly  be  called  foreknow- 
ledge. To  speak  of  God's  foreknowledge  is  an  accom- 
modation to  human  powers  of  understanding  like 
speaking  of  God's  coming  into  His  temple  or  going 
up  from  Abraham.  Yet,  since  the  conditions  of  time 
are  those  under  which  God  is  revealed  to  us  and  we 
are  assured  that  that  revelation  is  not  an  illusory  one, 
we  use  with  confidence  the  language  which  speaks  of 
God  as  foreknowing,- foreseeing,  foreordaining.  The 
objection  which  has  been  sometimes  urged  against 
God's  foreknowledge,  that  it  destroys  the  notion  of 
creaturely  liberty,  appears  to  be  based  upon  a  con- 
fusion of  thought.  God's  foreknowledge  of  events 
does  not  in  anj^  way  bring  the  events  about ;  it  is  not 
the  cause  of  what  is  to  come,  but  rather  the  result. 
There  can  be  ho  question  that  the  thing  which  will  be, 
will  be,  and  God  knows  what  it  will  be  :  but  that  is 


32 


His  Iminutability 


a  very  different  thing  from  saying  that  what  will  be, 
must  be,  and  that  God's  foreseeing  of  it  fixes  it  to  be. 
The  future  is  no  more  necessary  because  God  fore- 
know^s  it  than  it  w^ould  be  if  we  could  imagine  that  He 
did  not.  The  difficulties  connected  with  this  matter 
are  grave ;  but  they  appear  to  attach  themselves  rather 
to  the  thought  of  God's  omnipotence  than  to  that  of 
His  omniscience.  His  w^ill  rather  than  His  knowledge. 

The  second  main  inference  drawn  from  God's 
independence  of  temporal  succession  is  that  He  is 
immutable.  I  am  the  Lord,  I  change  not "  (Mai. 
iii.  6).  The  causes  which  produce  change  and  disloca- 
tion in  us  by  the  course  of  time  have  nothing  analogous 
to  them  in  the  life  of  God.  We  are  one  thing  to-day 
and  another  to-morrow,  but  God  is  unvaryingly  the 
same,  without  progress  or  falling  back,  without  altera- 
tion slow  or  sudden.  He  does  not  go  through  a  series 
of  transient  phases,  like  us.  This  is  what  is  meant  by 
calling  God  impassible,  or  exempt  from  passions.  He 
is  so,  in  the  same  sense  as  He  might  be  called  exempt 
from  actions.  We  cannot  tell  how  either  actions  or 
passions  appear  from  the  position  of  absolute  eternity, 
since  both  imply  to  our  minds  the  transition  from 
state  to  state  ;  but  with  this  caution  we  receive  in 
simple  faith  what  is  revealed  to  us  in  regard  to  both. 
We  are  compelled  to  think  of  God  as  engaged  in  a 
course  of  action  in  His  relation  to  the  world,  and  we 
are  compelled  to  think  of  Him  as  reacted  upon  by  it 
in  turn,  and,  as  He  follows  its  development,  experienc- 
ing now  satisfaction  and  now  pain.  Impassible  is  not 
the  same  as  unfeeling.    If  words  mean  anytliing,  God 


and  Impassibility, 


is  capable  of  grief  and  joy,  of  anger  and  of  gratifica- 
tion ;  though  there  is  nothing  which  can  force  such 
states  of  feeling  upon  Him  without  His  being  willing 
to  undergo  them.  It  would  be  a  defect  in  Him,  not  a 
perfection,  were  it  otherwise.  There  is  nothing  in 
this  thought  to  conflict  with  God's  revelation  of  Him- 
self as  eternally  happy.  He  is  the  blessed  God,'* 
the  blessed  and  only  Potentate  "  (1  Tim.  i.  11 ;  vi.  15), 
not  merely  as  the  object  of  His  creatures'  blessing 
(eiAoyrjroc)?  but  as  having  in  Himself  every  element  of 
perfect  bliss  {jLLaKapiog).  But  if  God  is  love,  in  any 
sense  intelligible  to  us,  He  would  be  without  an 
element  ot  bliss  if  He  were  incapable  of  suffering. 
Love,  unable  to  manifest  itself  through  a  true  self- 
sacrifice,  would  be  love  unsatisfied.  Therefore  we 
hold  that  the  phrases  in  which  God  speaks  of  Himself 
as  wounded  and  wearied  by  the  conduct  of  His 
creatures,  are  not  mere  metaphors,  but  substantial 
truths.  Only  we  must  remember  that  no  storms  of 
grief  can  shake  the  permanent  serenity  of  God  in 
its  inmost  deeps,  inasmuch  as  God  sees  the  end  from 
the  beginning,  and  knows  Himself  to  be  able  to  over- 
come at  last  all  that  now  causes  sorrow  to  Him  and  to 
those  whom  He  loves. 

For  the  all-knowing  and  eternal  God  is  revealed 
as  being  also  an  almighty  God.  By  this  title  He  is 
most  frequently  described  to  us,  not  only  in  the  Church 
Creeds,  but  in  the  Bible,  because  it  sums  up  all  the 
rest  of  the  Divine  attributes.  No  being  could  be 
almighty  whose  knowledge  was  limited,  who  should 
have  to  look  on  to  an  uncertain  future,  or  move  from 

D 


34 


His  Omnipotence. 


place  to  place  at  His  work,  who  was  irresolute  and 
divided  in  mind,  or  who  depended  for  His  complete- 
ness or  for  very  existence  upon  something  outside 
Himself.  God  has  revealed  Himself  to  us  as  almighty. 
In  other  words.  He  has  entire  freedom  of  action, 
coupled  with  unlimited  resources. 

Men  commonly  interpret  the  word  "  almighty  "  to 
mean  "  able  to  do  everything."  This,  however,  is  not 
accurate.  It  gives  a  false  idea  about  God ;  for  there 
are  some  things  which  God  cannot  do.  He  cannot 
deny  Himself."  It  is  impossible  for  God  to  lie  " 
(2  Tim.  ii.  13  ;  Heb.  vi.  18).  God  is  unable  to  do  any- 
thing bad,  or  capricious,  or  irrational,  or  self-con- 
tradictory. But  the  inability  is  not  due  to  any 
deficiency  of  power,  or  any  restriction  placed  upon 
God  from  without.  It  rises  from  the  fact  that  He 
knows  all  things,  and  therefore  cannot  be  deceived 
into  preferring  that  which  is  less  good.  God  is  not 
tempted  of  evil  things "  (S.  James  i.  13) ;  they  can 
have  no  attraction  for  Him.  He  can  do  whatever  He 
wills  ;  but  these  things  He  cannot,  by  His  very  nature, 
will  to  do.  It  is  impossible  for  the  perfect  to  choose 
to  be  less  than  perfect. 

Indeed,  the  Latin  word  omnijyotens  (as  well  as  the 
Greek  TravroKpanop,  which  it  represents)  conveys  a 
different  notion  from  that  of  power  to  do  anything. 
The  word  is  of  the  same  class  as  caelipotens,  "  master  of 
tlie  sky,"  armipotens,  "  master  of  arms,"  and  tlie  like. 
Omnipotens  means  "  master  of  all."  It  expresses  God's 
universal  sovereignty,  His  dominion  over  all  things 
tliat  are  or  that  can  be.    Fo)',  on  iho  one  hand,  God  is 


His  Omnipotence. 


35 


complete  master  of  Himself.  He  is  not,  like  the  god 
of  the  pantheist,  blindly  struggling  forward  into  self- 
possession.  "  God  is  light,  and  in  Him  is  no  dai'kness 
at  all"  (1  S.  John  i.  5).  He  is  profoundly  conscious 
of  all  His  own  fulness.  No  part  of  it  remains  for 
Him  yet  to  discover.  Thus  He  wields  all  His  infinite 
powers  with  an  unerring  precision,  and  cannot  be 
blinded  with  regard  to  the  issues  of  His  action.  This 
being  so,  it  follows  that  God  is  complete  master  of  all 
other  things  as  well.  For  all  things  that  are  not  God 
are  creatures  of  God ;  and  God  cannot  have  created 
anything  and  then  lost  the  control  of  it.  Thus  even 
those  things  which  seem  most  defiantly  and  out- 
rageously in  rebellion  against  Him  are  still  under  His 
hand,  and  His  omnipotence  will  be  proved  at  length 
the  more  strikingly  by  means  of  their  rebellion.  A 
great  but  limited  power  may  dispose  of  things  and 
forces  which  cannot  choose  for  themselves ;  but 
nothing  but  omnipotence  can  create  free  wills,  and 
give  them  full  play,  and  remain  sovereign  over  them. 

§  13. 

It  was,  perhaps,  imaginable— though  barely  so— 
that  these  attributes  might  have  been  found  in  a 
being  without  any  moral  character,  or  even  with 
a  character  that  was  immoral.  Though  a  Socrates 
was  able  to  teach  that  "  virtue  is  knowledge,"  yet,  in 
our  present  fallen  condition,  we  should  hardly  have 
known  for  certain,  without  revelation,  the  true  nature 
of  virtue  and  vice,  and  therefore  the  necessary  alliance 
between  perfect  knowledge  and  perfect  holiness.  Left 


36  God  and  the  Moral  Law. 


to  themselves,  men  have  worshipped  gods  of  the  vilest 
wickedness.  Heathen  religions  teach  that  the  deity- 
may  do  what  is  evil  without  suffering  contamination, 
even  as  light  is  uncontaminated  by  shining  on  a  dung- 
hill. But  our  God  is  known  to  us  as  a  being  of  perfect 
and  infinite  righteousness.  Moral  light  and  intellectual 
light  are  found  to  be  the  same  thing  in  Him  who  is 
Light,"  constituting  the  glory  in  which  God  lives. 

This  glory  cannot  be  approached  by  man  (1  Tim. 
vi.  16) ;  but  it  is  everywhere  assumed  that  men  are 
capable  of  apprehending  it  aright.  From  the  per- 
ceptions of  our  conscience,  when  our  conscience  is 
enlightened  by  grace  and  purified  by  honest  striving- 
after  moral  truth,  we  can  argue  confidently  to  the 
moral  action  of  God.  The  moral  law  is  not,  like  time 
and  space,  a  limitation  imposed  by  the  Creator  upon 
His  creatures  while  He  is  Himself  independent  of  it. 
He  gives  us  clearly  to  understand  that  right  and 
wrong  are  the  same  for  Himself  as  for  us.  The  rule 
of  justice  and  purity  is  not  an  arbitrary  and  con- 
ventional rule  which  could  have  been  other  than  it  is. 
Right  is  not  right  simply  because  it  is  the  will  of  God ; 
wrong  is  not  wrong  merely  because  God  has  forbidden 
it.  These  names  are  not  an  expression  for  some 
personal  preferences  of  our  Maker.  It  would  have 
l)een  impossible  for  Him  to  have  made  wrong  to  be 
right,  or  right  to  be  wrong,  by  an  exercise  of  authority. 
God  Himself  does  right  because  it  is  right. 

Yet,  at  the  same  time,  it  must  not  be  supposed 
that  the  moral  law  exists  independently  of  God,  or 
that  He  finds  it  imposed  upon  Him  by  some  external 


God's  Righteousness. 


37 


necessity,  and  obeys  it  as  a  subject,  or  even  administers 
it  as  a  governor  responsible  to  the  law  which  He 
administers.  There  is  no  such  thing  as  a  moral  law 
apart  from  God.  He  is  the  moral  law.  That  law  for 
us  cannot  fully  be  expressed  in  precepts,  not  even  in 
the  nicest  subtleties  of  directors  of  the  conscience.  It 
is  essentially  a  living  ideal.  That  "  perfect  law  of 
liberty  "  (S.  James  i.  25)  by  which  we  are  ruled  con- 
sists in  nothing  else  but  the  imitation  of  the  Divine 
character.  To  this  it  owes  its  freedom,  its  infinite 
depth,  and  its  unity.  Be  ye  therefore  perfect,""  so 
our  Lord  sums  up  the  new  code  of  His  kingdom, 
"  even  as  your  Father  which  is  in  heaven  is  perfect " 
(S.  Matt.  V.  48). 

But  such  terms  as  "the  moral  law''  are  too  cold 
to  be  used  in  connexion  with  the  character  of  God. 
He  is  perfectly  calm,  it  is  true,  and  fulfils  His  own 
infinite  ideal  of  moral  perfection  without  a  struggle, 
without  an  effort,  without  need  of  vigilance.  It  is 
natural  to  Him.  And  yet  the  whole  energy  of  the 
Divine  Being  is  in  it.  For  He  is  not  merely  pure," 
as  one  whom  no  evil  thing  has  ever  sullied  (Hab. 
i.  13).  He  is  not  merely  "faithful"  (1  Cor.  x.  13; 
1  S.  Pet.  iv.  19),  as  one  who  recognises  that  He  owes 
a  duty  and  who  is  ready  to  perform  it.  He  is  not 
merely  "  righteous  "  (Ps.  vii.  9  ;  2  Thess.  i.  6),  as  one 
who  will  see  equity  all  round  Him,  and  will  scrupu- 
lously bring  home  to  all  the  true  nature  of  their  deeds. 
Purity  and  faithfulness  and  righteousness  might 
possibly  be  found  in  one  who  was  in  some  degree 
apathetic.    But  God  is  holy.    By  that  word,  all  good 


38 


God's  Holiness. 


moral  qualities  which  we  regard  separately,  like  light 
when  broken  by  a  prism,  are  shown  to  be  one,  and 
that  one  quality  is  shown  in  its  beauty  and  its  in- 
tensity. God  is  holy.  He  burns  with  love  of  all  that 
is  noble,  and  with  hatred  of  all  that  is  base.  "  The 
righteous  Lord  loveth  righteousness  "  (Ps.  xi.  '7).  It 
is  the  idea  of  His  holiness  which  enables  us  to  under- 
stand those  strange  words  in  which  the  prophets  speak 
of  His  vehement  transports  of  wrath  against  sin.  "  God 
is  jealous,  and  the  Lord  revengeth ;  the  Lord  re- 
vengeth,  and  is  furious.  .  ,  .  Who  can  stand  before 
His  indignation  ?  and  who  can  abide  in  the  fierceness 
of  His  anger  ?  His  fury  is  poured  out  like  fire,  and 
the  rocks  are  thrown  down  by  Him  "  (Nah.  i.  2 — 6). 
At  first  sight  it  might  seem  as  if  holiness  meant 
nothing  but  the  absence  of  evil ;  but  that  is  because 
we  have  so  little  acquaintance  with  positive  moral 
beauty.  Even  God's  hatred  of  sin  is  not  a  full 
measure  of  His  love  of  righteousness ;  for  sin  is  not 
an  infinite  thing,  but  righteousness  is  infinite  (Ps.  Ixxi. 
15).  The  holiness  of  God  is  that  which  constitutes 
His  irresistible  attractiveness.  It  is  not  the  sight  of 
God's  uncreated  eternity,  nor  of  His  majestic  unity, 
nor  of  His  exhaustive  knowledge,  nor  of  His  all- 
mastering  might,  nor  even  of  His  severe  justice,  which 
most  moves  the  hearts  of  His  intelligent  creatures  to 
adoration.  It  is  the  ever-deepening  perception  which 
they  have  of  the  steady  and  awful  zeal  for  that 
which  is  morally  right  which  lives  within  Him.  Before 
tliis,  the  Seraphim,  who  for  countless  ages  have  had 
the  uninterrupted  task  of  contemplation,  hide  their 


God's  Love. 


39 


eyes  and  cry  continually,  as  i£  "  stung  with  the 
splendour  of  a  sudden  thought,"  their  admiration  of 
fresh  glories  of  His  holiness  coming  into  view.  And 
we,  who  are  not,  like  them,  unfallen,  serve  God  with 
reverence  aiid  godly  fear,  acknowledging  that  "  our 
God  is  a  consuming  fire  "  (Heb.  xii.  29). 

But  the  crowning  revelation  vouchsafed  to  us  con- 
cerning the  nature  and  character  of  God  is  contained 
in  the  words,  "  God  is  Love  "  (1  S.  John  iv.  8, 16).  We 
know  what  love  is  because  we  are  capable  of  loving. 
It  is  no  vague  general  benevolence.  Still  less  is  it  a 
hunger  for  something  which  will  supply  a  felt  want. 
It  is  a  strong  and  calm  outgoing  of  the  being  towards 
personal  objects.  Its  main  exhibition  lies  in  seeking 
the  highest  benefit  of  the  beloved,  not  counting  the 
cost  to  itself.  It  cannot,  indeed,  be  contented  until  it 
receives  love  in  answer  to  love  ;  yet  it  does  not  love 
for  the  sake  of  the  reward  which  it  expects.  It  says, 
with  the  voice  of  its  great  exponent  (whatever  the 
true  text  may  be),  I  will  gladly  spend  and  be  spent 
for  you,  though  the  more  abundantly  I  love  you  the 
less  I  be  loved  "  (2  Cor.  xii.  15).  "  Love  sufFereth  long, 
and  is  kind ;  love  envieth  not ;  love  vaunteth  not 
itself,  is  not  puffed  up,  doth  not  behave  itself  unseemly, 
seeketh  not  the  things  which  are  its  own,  is  never 
provoked,  taketh  no  account  of  the  evil ;  rejoiceth  not 
at  unrighteousness,  but  rejoiceth  along  with  the  truth ; 
beareth  with  all  things,  believeth  all  things,  hopeth 
all  things,  endureth  all  things    (1  Cor.  xiii.  4 — 7).  This 


40 


GocTs  Love. 


is  the  description  of  God.  Love  is  His  very  being  ;  it 
is  not  an  attribute  which  mixes  in  among  the  rest  and 
tempers  their  exhibition.  All  the  other  attributes  are 
attributes  of  love.  It  is  love  that  is  one  and  indi- 
visible. The  omniscience  is  the  omniscience  of  love ; 
love  is  everywhere  present ;  love  is  eternal.  Omnipo- 
tence belongs  to  love  ;  righteousness  and  holiness  mark 
the  character  of  love.  Whatever  God  does,  love  does, 
and  He  does  it  because  He  loves.  Whatever  perfect 
love  would  design,  God  designs  and  will  perform ;  for 
love  and  God  are  but  two  names  to  express  the  same 
meaning. 


ClIArTER  IL 


T/ie  Athanaslan  Creed  the  Church'' s  expression  of  Responsibility  for  the 
Truth — Doctrine  of  the  Ty-inity  no  figjiient — Error  of  Tritheisvi 
and  of  Sabellianisin — Difficulty  of  Arian  teaching  f'om  point  of 
view  of  Philosophy — A  Trinity  of  Perso7ts  required  by  the  conception 
of  God  as  self  conscious  Love — Distinctioit  of  the  Three  as  revealed 
in  Scripture — Subo7'dination  of  the  Son  and  Spirit  to  the  Father, 

§  1. 

To  many  persons,  not  otherwise  prejudiced  against 
Christianity,  the  doctrine  that  there  are  Three  Persons 
in  the  Godhead  is  a  serious  stumbling-block.  They 
imagine  that  they  would  find  it  simpler  to  believe  in 
a  God  who  should  be  one  person  as  well  as  one  sub- 
stance, like  the  God  presented  by  the  Muhammadan 
or  by  the  modern  Jewish  religion.  It  seems  to  them 
a  needless  complication,  an  arbitrary  dogmatic  impo- 
sition, to  teach  that  there  is  a  Father,  a  Son,  and  a 
Spirit,  who  are  all  One.  If  they  do  not  think  it  an 
actual  contradiction,  a  sheer  impossibility,  they  think 
it  a  metaphysical  puzzle,  which  the  brains  of  ordinary 
Christians  ought  not  to  be  troubled  with.  The  diffi- 
culty felt  by  such  persons  is  increased  by  the  solemnity 
with  which  the  Church  has  insisted  upon  the  impor- 


42      Purpose  of  the  Athanasian  Creed. 


tance  of  this  doctrine.  The  Quimmque  vidt,  by  its 
warnings,  even  more  than  by  the  difficult  language  of 
its  statements,  repels  them  from  assenting  to  the 
truths  asserted.  Whether  that  psalm  is  suited  in 
the  present  state  of  things  for  public  recitation,  may 
without  disloyalty  be  debated.  But  it  is  to  be  observed 
that  the  warnings  of  the  Qwimmqiie  are  not  addressed 
to  the  world  outside,  or  to  those  who  have  never 
received  the  faith.  It  is  the  Church's  warning  to 
herself  and  to  her  own  children  who  anxiously  desire 
to  be  saved.  It  is  an  exhortation  to  prize  the  great 
treasure  which  is  committed  to  the  Church,  and  to 
her  alone.  The  Church  is  the  repository  of  revealed 
truth.  She  holds  it  in  trust  for  mankind,  and  is 
responsible  to  God  for  keeping  it  whole  and  unde- 
filed,"  that  is,  without  mutilation  and  without  ad- 
mixture. False  notions  having  been  circulated  from 
time  to  time  by  persons  who  claimed  to  represent  her, 
she  was  bound  to  point  out  to  the  faithful  where  those 
false  notions  differed  from  the  truth  as  she  had  received 
it,  and  to  warn  those  who  cared  for  her  judgment  of 
the  grave  moral  fault  they  would  incur  if  they  .should 
treat  the  revelation  of  God  irreverently,  whether 
through  negligence  they  allowed  the  truth  to  be 
forgotten,  or  through  presumption  defined  it  amiss. 

The  Qiiiciimqiie,  in  its  intention  at  least,  is  not 
an  attempt  to  impose  metaphysical  subtleties,  but  to 
oppose  them.  It  forbids  them ;  it  keeps  the  ground 
clear,  and  will  not  permit  "  the  Name  of  the  Father, 
and  of  tlic  Son,  and  of  tlic  Holy  Ghost "  to  be  reduced 
l)y  tliosc  who  have  been  baptized  into  it  to  tlic  barren 


Importance  of  Doctrine  of  the  Trinity.  43 


unrealities  invented  by  a  Sabellius  or  an  Arius.  But 
in  thus  resisting  the  aggressions  of  a  profane  human 
speculation,  the  Church  encourages  us  to  study  de- 
voutly the  real  nature  of  the  threefold  Name.  We  are 
not  to  pass  it  over  as  if  it  meant  nothing.  It  is  not 
"  a  vain  thing  for  us ;  (Deui  xxxii.  47),  which  we 
may  safely  ignore.  We  ought  to  try  our  best  to 
understand  it  and  so  to  grow  in  the  knowledge  of 
God.  All  that  the  Church  insists  upon  is  that  we 
should  not  approach  the  subject  in  the  spirit  of  dis- 
putants, but  with  veneration  and  awe,  and  the  desire 
simply  to  be  taught  of  God.  "  The  Catholic  faith  is 
this — not  that  we  define,  or  understand,  or  assent,  or 
subscribe  to  anything,  but — "  that  we  worship  one  God 
in  Trinity,  and  the  Trinity  in  Unity." 

§2. 

In  order  to  be  assured  that  the  doctrine  is  not  a 
mere  figment — that  it  cannot  be  dismissed  unheard — 
two  of  the  passages  of  Holy  Scripture  which  bear  upon 
the  point  may  be  examined.  We  find  our  Lord  bidding 
His  disciples  to  baptize  all  nations  into  the  Name  of 
the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost " 
(S.  Matt,  xxviii.  19).  It  is  obvious  that  He  is  not 
simply  dictating  a  form  of  words  to  be  used  in  the 
administration  of  Baptism.  "  Into  the  Name,''  He 
says,  not  "  in  "  it.  He  sums  up,  in  this  brief  descrip- 
tion, the  whole  revelation  which  He  came  on  earth  to 
bring.  That  Name  is  the  Gospel.  Every  spiritual 
privilege  we  enjoy  is  to  be  found  in  it.  Our  Baptism 
ushers  us  into  it;  for  it  puts  us  into  a  living  con- 


44    Testimony  of  the  Baptismal  Formula. 


nexion  with  the  God  who  is  thus  set  forth,  and  who 
obviously  wishes  us  to  understand  what  the  Name 
means.  But  we  mark  that  our  Lord  does  not  speak 
of  baptizing  men  into  the  "  Names,"  as  if  they  were 
plural.  They  cannot  be  dissociated  from  each  other. 
The  Name  is  one.  Now,  we  could  hardly  imagine 
that  Christ  would  use  such  a  phrase,  with  its  preg- 
nant assertion  of  the  unity  of  the  Name,  if  "  Father, 
Son,  and  Holy  Ghost "  represented  notions  so  separate 
as  those  of  God,  and  a  human  prophet,  and  a  sancti- 
fying influence.  He  must  needs,  in  that  case,  have  at 
least  used  the  plural,  or,  as  He  often  did  when  He 
would  imply  a  distinction  (S.  Matt.  xvii.  27 ;  S.  John 
XX.  17),  repeated  the  word  :  "  baptizing  them  into  the 
Name  of  the  Father,  and  into  the  Name  of  the  Son, 
and  into  the  Name  of  the  Holy  Ghost."  By  choosing 
without  repetition  to  say  the  Name,"  He  teaches  that 
the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Ghost  are  one.  The 
revelation  of  each  of  the  Three  is  the  revelation  of  the 
other  Two.  They  cannot  be  known  apart.  There  are 
not  three  names  of  three  separate  beings ;  but  the 
Name  of  the  one  God  is,  when  written  out  full  a 
threefold  Name. 

And  yet  throughout  the  New  Testament  the  dis- 
tinction between  the  Three  is  as  clearly  kept  and 
brought  out  as  Their  unity.  Thus  our  Lord  at  the 
Last  Supper  says  to  His  disciples,  "  I  Avill  pray  the 
Father,  and  He  shall  give  you  another  Comforter,  that 
He  may  be  with  you  tor  ever,  even  the  Spirit  of 
truth"  (S.  Jolm  xiv.  IG).  Here  the  personal  distinc- 
tions arc  clear  and  sharp.         Son  praj^s  ;  the  Father 


Testimony  of  the  Promise  of  the  Comforter.  45 


hears  and  gives ;  the  Holy  Ghost  comes.  The  Son  is 
not  the  same  as  the  Father ;  for  how  could  He  inter- 
cede with  Himself  ?  The  Father  is  not  the  same  as 
the  Spirit ;  for  how  could  the  Father  "  give Himself 
in  the  sense  which  is  here  required,  and  which  is 
afterwards  explained  by  the  word  send (ver.  26)  ? 
The  Spirit  is  not  the  same  as  the  Son ;  for  how  could 
He  in  that  case  be  ''another  Comforter/'  a  perma- 
nent substitute  for  the  Comforter  whose  brief  sojourn 
was  ending  ?  If  the  Name  into  which  we  are  baptized 
leads  us  to  think  of  the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the 
Holy  Ghost  as  an  indivisible  unity,  this  great  promise 
of  Christ  as  clearly  sets  before  us  the  actions  of  a 
distinct  Trinity.  From  the  one  we  learn  not  to 
"  divide  the  substance  ;  "  from  the  other,  not  to  ''  con- 
found the  Persons."  There  are  many  other  such 
passages  in  Holy  Scripture,  and  these  are  only  selected 
as  samples  in  which  all  the  Divine  Three  are,  in  a 
marked  way,  mentioned  together.  It  will  be  felt  that 
no  other  interpretation  answers  so  simply  and  so 
deeply  to  the  natural  meaning  of  them  as  the  Catholic 
interpretation  does. 

§  3. 

The  Catholic  interpretation  of  these  and  other 
passages  guards  the  reader  of  Scriptvire  from  two 
opposite  mistakes,  either  of  which  might  easily  be 
made  without  impugning  the  Godhead  of  the  Son  and 
Spirit,  and  either  of  which  would  cloud  the  clearness 
of  our  Christian  hope.  The  first  of  these  mistakes  is 
known  by  the  name  of  Tritheism,  or  supposing  that 


46       Christianity  a  pure  Monotheism. 


there  are  three  Gods.  This  belief  has  never  been 
formally  maintained;  but  it  is  unconsciously  the 
creed  of  a  great  many  persons  who  have  no  wish  to 
dispute  the  teaching  of  the  Church.  They  think  of 
the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Ghost  as  three 
separate  Beings,  possessed  of  the  same  glorious  attri- 
butes, and  bound  together  by  mutual  love  and  concord ; 
accommodating  and  serviceable  in  many  ways  to  each 
others'  schemes,  but  independent  of  each  other,  and 
not  necessary  to  one  another's  existence  or  complete- 
ness. For  those  whose  thoughts  take  a  tritheistic 
shape,  the  Son  might  (imaginably)  cease  to  exist,  and 
the  Father  still  remain  the  same,  intact '  or  a  period 
could  be  conceived  of  at  which  no  Holy  Spirit  was, 
and  yet  the  Father  and  the  Son  existed  in  all  their 
perfection  without  feeling  much  difference  This  is 
the  form  of  thought  and  feeling  which  the  Quicumqiie 
says  is  forbidden  by  the  Catholic  religion.'  It 
would  be  ''to  say,  There  be  three  Gods,  or  three 
Lords.''  The  Catholic  religion  asserts,  with  all  sin- 
cerity and  earnestness,  the  purest  and  loftiest  mono- 
theism. We  have  no  need  to  explain  anything  away 
— we  are  in  no  degree  juggling  with  words — when  we 
repeat  that  God  is  One.  We  believe  it  without 
qualification  or  reserve.  We  rest  upon  this  fact  as 
the  one  great  fundamental  truth.  We  pray  to  be 
tauf/'lit  it  as  the  highest  work  of  the  Spirit — 

"  Teach  us  to  know  the  Father,  Son, 
And  Thee,  of  both,  to  be  but  one." 

Polytheism,  of  any  form  or  kind,  is  only  possible  for 
men  whose  notions  of  what  is  meant  by  the  woi'd 


The  Divine  Substance  tmique.  47 


"God''  are  entirely  unlike  ours.  The  Divine  "sub- 
stance "  is  not,  like  creaturely  "  substances,"  a  sub- 
stance which  admits  of  being  found  in  modified  forms 
in  a  number  of  different  beings.  Humanity,  with  its 
limitations  and  imperfections,  though  one  and  the 
same  substance  everywhere,  yet  appears  in  countless 
separate  specimens,  each  of  whom  is  a  man.  But  the 
very  notion  of  Deity  is  such  that  we  cannot  conceive 
of  it  as  possessed  by  more  than  one  being.  Two 
or  three  or  more  beings  of  infinite  perfection,  but 
mutually  exclusive,  cannot  co-exist;  for  they  must 
necessarily  be  limited  by  each  other,  which  would  be 
a  contradiction  in  terms.  Nothing  of  the  kind  is 
taught  by  the  Christian  doctrine  of  the  Trinity. 

For  the  threefold  personality  of  God  does  not 
contradict  His  unity  in  any  way ;  it  shows  the  manner 
or  condition  of  it.  There  are  not  three  independent 
units  side  by  side,  on  a  level  with  each  other,  each 
almighty,  each  eternal,  each  finding  in  Himself  the 
source  of  His  own  life.  The  unity  between  the  three 
blessed  Persons  is  not  a  similarity  of  character  and 
qualities  and  powers,  not  a  harmony  of  wills  and 
purposes  between  three  individuals  belonging  to  the 
same  species — three  beings  each  of  whom  is  a  God. 
It  is  a  true,  though  inexpressible,  unity  of  Three 
Persons  mutually  depending  upon  each  other  and 
completing  each  other,  indivisible,  and  incapable  of 
existence  apart  from  one  another.  The  life  of  all 
Three  is  one  and  the  same  life,  and  it  has  but  one 
source,  not  three.  The  very  titles  by  which  They  are 
known  to  us  imply  this.    They  are  not  proper  names, 


48 


Error  of  Tritheism. 


like  those  o£  heathen  divinities,  but  titles  of  relation- 
ship, which  involve  each  other,  and  would  be  meaning- 
less alone.  Fatherhood  is  impossible  without  sonship, 
and  sonship  without  fatherhood ;  a  spirit  (in  the 
sense  in  which  the  word  is  applied  to  the  Holy  Ghost) 
is  impossible  without  one  whose  spirit  it  is.  The 
distinction  between  the  Persons  of  the  Trinity  consists 
in  this  mutual  relationship,  and  in  that  alone.  God  is 
one  Being,  who  is  Father,  because  He  eternally  finds 
Himself  in  a  Son  and  Spirit,  begotten  of  Him  and 
proceeding  from  Him,  not  by  a  mere  act  of  His  will, 
but  by  the  very  necessity  of  His  nature ;  and  yet  not 
by  the  mere  necessity  of  His  nature,  but  by  the  act 
of  His  loving  will.  It  is  He  that  is  in  Them,  and 
They  are  in  Him.  Instead  of  being  mutually  exclu- 
sive, the  Three  are  in  reality  mutually  inclusive,  and 
contained  in  each  other,  though  never  confused  to- 
gether. The  Father  never  loses  His  identity  in  the 
Son,  nor  the  Son  in  the  Father,  nor  the  Spirit  in 
either ;  for  if  ever  such  a  thing  could  imaginably  take 
place,  it  would  be  the  end  of  all  the  Three  alike,  since 
They  only  exist,  as  distinct  persons,  by  virtue  of  Their 
relationship  ; — but  it  is  numerically  one  and  the  same 
infinite  Being  whom  we  adore,  whether  we  adore  Him 
in  His  primal  and  original  self  as  Father,  or  in  the  Son 
wlio  reveals  Him,  or  in  the  Spirit  who  communicates 
Him.  For  this  reason  it  is  that  we  are  cautioned  not 
to  speak  of  three  almighty  ones,  or  three  eternal  ones, 
or  (according  to  the  teaching  of  S.  Ambrose)  even  of 
three  holy  ones,  although  each  of  the  Three  is  holy 
and  eternal  and  almighty ;  because  to  speak  in  such 


Sabellian  Conception  of  God, 


49 


a  manner  would  imply  only  a  likeness  between  three 
separate  specimens  of  a  class  which  might  without 
absurdity  be  thought  more  numerous. 

§4. 

The  opposite  mistake  to  Tritheism  is  that  which 
is  known  to  students  of  history  by  the  name  of 
Sabellianism.  That  name  is  derived  from  an  early 
teacher  who  hoped  to  make  the  doctrine  of  the  Holy 
Trinity  easier  by  some  such  explanation  as  the  follow- 
ing. We  find  Divine  actions  ascribed  to  a  Father,  a 
Son,  and  a  Holy  Spirit ;  yet,  if  God  is  one,  all  these 
names  must  be  names  for  the  one  God.  That  one 
God,  accordingly,  must  be  pleased  to  act  sometimes 
as  Father,  sometimes  as  Son,  and  sometimes  as 
Spirit,  sometimes  as  all  three.  For  example,  He  acts 
as  Father  when  He  initiates  or  creates ;  He  acts  as 
Son  when  He  puts  into  execution  what  He  has,  as 
Father,  willed ;  He  acts  as  Spirit  when  He  imparts 
life  and  consciousness  and  moral  freedom  by  infusing 
Himself  into  that  which,  as  Father  and  Son,  He  has 
formed.  But  in  Himself  He  is  none  of  these.  He 
passes  from  one  to  the  other.  The  so-called  Persons" 
may  come  and  go ;  they  have  no  permanent  being. 
They  only  express  a  threefold  relation  of  the  one  God 
towards  us,  as  displayed  in  three  manners  of  dealing. 
It  is  but  Sabellianism  exaggerated  to  maintain  that 
the  persons  are  only  notions  of  ours ;  and  that,  except 
in  our  perception,  they  would  not  exist  at  all — that 
they  are  but  three  phases  or  aspects  of  God,  names 
for  God  as  observed  from  different  points  of  view ; 

E 


50      Unsatisfactoriness  of  Sabellianism. 


God  not  being  conscious  of  heing  Father,  Son,  and 
Spirit,  but  only  of  being  tlioiight  so.  According  to 
this  form  of  the  theory,  the  difference  between  the 
persons  only  began  when  there  was  an  intelligent 
creation  to  see  the  difference.  But  whether  the 
difference  depends  on  our  perception,  or  whether  the 
difference  is  now  a  real  one  to  God  Himself,  in  either 
case,  if  the  creation  were  to  pass  away,  the  difference 
would  pass  away  also,  and  only  an  abstract  God  be 
left,  neither  Father,  nor  Son,  nor  Holy  Spirit.  The 
Unity  (or  rather,  the  Unit),"  said  Sabellius,  has  come 
to  be  a  Trinity  by  expansion."  It  is  not,  therefore, 
the  original  and  eternal  condition  of  God,  but  only 
began  with  the  beginning  of  the  world,  and  the 
Trinity  would  relapse  into  a  Unity  when  no  world 
was  left  for  it  to  be  exhibited  in. 

Such  is  roughly  the  Sabellian  conception  of  the 
Trinity.  But  if  it  were  the  real  meaning  of  the 
language  of  Scripture,  then  these  names  of  Father, 
Son,  and  Spirit  would  be  mere  illusions.  They  would 
deceive  us.  The  Scriptures  would  then  be  no  true 
revelation  of  the  nature  of  God ;  on  the  contrary,  they 
would  suggest  what  is  actually  false.  We  should  be 
mocked  by  an  appearance  of  mutual  recognition  and 
love  between  these  imaginary — or,  at  best,  transitory 
■ — "  Persons."  Instead  of  having  to  do  with  a  real 
heavenly  Father,  made  known  to  us  in  a  real  in- 
carnate Son,  by  the  illumination  of  a  real  indwelling 
Spirit,  we  should  find  ourselves  face  to  face,  after  all, 
with  an  unintelligible,  impersonal  God,  who  had  played 
upon  us  and  confused  our  understandings  for  a  time 


It  impairs  the  Hope  of  Eternal  Life,  51 


by  showing  Himself  to  us  under  three  disguises.  If, 
according  to  the  Catholic  tradition,  the  distinction  of 
the  Three  Persons  is  an  eternal  distinction,  wc  can 
understand  how  God  is  indeed  eternally  love,  within 
Himself,  and  not  merely  love  towards  us ;  but  if  the 
Persons  are  confounded,  as  Sabellius  confounded 
them,  then  love  can  only  have  begun  when  there 
w^as  a  creation  to  be  loved,  and  we  have  no  guarantee 
that  it  will  continue.  And  indeed,  if  God's  eternal 
state  is  higher  than  any  manifestations  of  Himself 
can  be,  we  should  imagine  that  the  so-called  Unity 
would  have  to  reassert  itself  some,  time  or  another,  and 
reabsorb  the  temporary  Trinity  under  which  it  had 
been  pleased  to  figure ;  and,  as  creation  owes  its 
origin  to  the  act  by  which  the  Unity  broke  out  into 
a  Trinity,  the  return  of  the  Godhead  to  its  original 
Unity  must  needs  carry  with  it  the  annihilation  of  all 
creaturely  existence.  A  Sabellian  conception  of  the 
Trinity  weakens  the  hope  of  eternal  life  as  much 
as  the  Catholic  faith  assures  it.  "  This  is  the  life 
eternal,  that  they  may  know  Thee  the  only  true  God, 
and  Him  whom  Thou  didst  send,  even  J esus  Christ 
(S.  John  xvii.  3). 

§5. 

The  two  forms  of  thought  which  we  have  now 
considered  agree  in  this,  that  they  justly  acknow- 
ledge, in  Scripture,  the  Godhead  of  Father,  Son,  and 
Spirit,  though  Tritheism  does  so  at  the  expense  of  the 
eternal  Unity,  and  Sabellianism  at  the  expense  of  the 
eternal  Trinity.    Arianism,  on  the  other  hand,  in  its 


52      Arianisin :  its  apparent  Simplicity 


ancient  and  modern  forms,  including  an  immense 
range  o£  opinions  from  Socinianism  upwards,  would 
cut  the  knot  by  denying  the  Godhead  of  the  Second 
and  Third  Persons,  and  teaching  that  the  Father  alone 
is,  in  the  full  sense,  God. 

Such  a  system  does  not  profess — at  any  rate  in 
the  first  instance — to  be  derived  from  a  large  and 
careful  study  of  Scripture.  It  is  a  philosophy.  It 
comes  to  the  Scripture  already  determined  that  there 
is  but  one  God,  and  that  the  unity  of  God  is  incom- 
patible with  a  Trinity  of  Persons.  It  rejects  the 
Christian  doctrine  of  the  Godhead  not  on  the  plea  that 
it  is  unscriptural,  but  on  the  plea  that  it  is  irrational. 
The  prima  facie  view  of  many  isolated  texts  would 
appear  to  favour  this  philosophy,  and  ingenuity 
can  devise  ways  of  dealing  with  other  texts;  but 
meanwhile  the  stronghold  of  the  Arian  position  lies 
in  its  supposed  logical  simplicity.  While  the  Catholic 
doctrine  seems  far-fetched  and  intricate,  the  Arian 
doctrine  seems  obvious  and  easy.  Why  cannot  we 
believe,  it  is  asked,  in  an  Almighty  Father,  a  personal. 
Jiving,  loving  God,  without  adding  a  belief  in  a  co- 
equal Son  and  Spirit  ? 

Plausible  as  that  theory  seems,  it  involves  graver 
difficulties  than  the  revealed  doctrine.  Not  only  is 
the  language  of  Sci'ipture  about  the  Son  and  the 
Holy  Ghost  unsatisfied  by  Arian  explanations ;  but, 
on  serious  refiexion,  the  very  notion  of  a  personal 
God  who  is  but  one  person  becomes,  as  a  philosophy, 
impossible  to  rest  in  intellectually.  A  man  may 
fancy  that  he  can  think  of  such  a  thing,  but  he  cannot 


inconsistent  with  God's  Self-consciousness.  53 


really.  It  is,  in  fact,  unthinkable.  Sabellianism  here 
lays  itself  open  to  the  same  charge  as  Arianism.  For 
we  are  bound  to  think  of  God  as  containing  in  His 
own  Being  all  that  is  needed  for  His  own  perfection. 
He  must  be  self-sufficing.  We  cannot  imagine  Him 
depending  upon  anj^thing  outside  of  Himself.  Creation 
does  not  supply  a  void  in  the  life  of  God,  who  must 
have  been  all  that  He  now  is  before  the  world  was,  and 
can  undergo  no  change  or  modification,  for  worse  or 
for  better,  by  reason  of  contact  with  the  world.  Now, 
so  far  as  we  can  understand,  a  solitary  unit  could 
have  no  perceptions  at  all.  Suppose  a  man  to  be 
born  entirely  without  communion  with  the  world 
around  him,  possessing,  indeed,  the  faculties  of  sight, 
hearing,  touch,  taste,  smell,  but  in  some  way  seques- 
tered from  all  objects  on  which  to  exercise  those 
faculties,  even  the  other  parts  of  his  own  body  being 
withdrawn  from  his  sight  and  feeling  ;  suppose, 
further,  that  no  intellectual  or  spiritual  touch  from 
outside  were  allowed  to  come  near  him,  although  the 
man  was  naturally  capable  of  converse  with  intellectual 
and  spiritual  beings;  in  short,  suppose  such  a  one 
to  be  absolutely  isolated  from  all  other  things  in 
existence ; — is  it  conceivable  that  he  should  attain 
to  consciousness  of  his  own  being,  or,  indeed,  have 
any  thoughts  at  all  ?  We  cannot  imagine  such  a 
one  to  have  even  the  perceptions  of  an  animal.  This, 
on  the  Arian  supposition,  was  the  condition  of  God 
before  the  worlds  were  made,  or  at  least  before  the 
Son  was  begotten. 

Still  more  difficult  it  is  to  reconcile  the  Arian  sup- 


54        Arianism  obscures  God's  Love. 


position  with  the  doctrine  of  the  love  of  God.  God  is 
Love.  That  is  His  essence.  And  love  is  not  love 
without  exercise.  Until  it  finds  an  object,  there  is 
but  a  capacity  for  love,  not  love  itself.  If  God,  there- 
fore, had  no  object  for  His  love  until  He  had  formed 
a  creation,  then  God  has  not  always  been  love — is  not 
love  by  Himself  in  His  own  nature,  but  only  (so  to 
speak)  accidentally,  through  the  circumstances  in 
which  He  finds  Himself.  And  ev^n  now,  if  creation 
be  the  sole  object  of  God's  love,  IJe  cannot  find  in  it 
adequate  exercise  for  the  whole  of  His  love.  For  we 
have  no  reason  to  suppose  that  creation  is,  or  can  be, 
infinite.  It  may  well  be  doubted  v/hether  the  total 
fulness  of  God's  being  can  ever  be  expressed  in  that 
which  God  makes.  Therefore,  although  infinite  love 
is  at  work  in  every  part  of  creation,  yet  the  exercise 
of  it  upon  creation  is  not  infinite.  There  remains 
behind  an  infinite  reserve  of  love,  which  never  can  be 
expended  to  the  blessed  satisfaction  of  God  upon  any 
existing  thing  which  falls  short  of  Himself.  And  if 
we  say  that  before  creation  was,  the  infinite  love  of 
God  was  infinitely  expended  upon  Himself,  we  cannot 
but  feel  that  such  an  expression  would  be  shocking  to 
all  our  best  instincts,  if  God  is  a  single  person.  A 
monstrous  selfishness  is  the  only  picture  which  such 
language  could  suggest.  It  can  only  be  morally  true 
to  say  that  God  loves  Himself,  if  there  be  eternally 
within  the  Divine  nature  a  real  distinction  of  Persons, 
whereby  one  Divine  Person  may  lavish  the  infinite 
wealth  of  His  love  upon  another  Di\  ine  Person,  wlio 
is  iuliuitcly  wortliy  of  receiving  it. 


It  makes  God  unlike  Man. 


55 


It  may,  of  course,  be  said  that  we  are  judging  from 
what  we  know  of  limited,  human,  existence ;  and  that 
what  applies  to  a  limited  being  neecj  not  perforce 
apply  to  an  infinite,  a  Divine  beijig.  This  is  quite 
true ;  but  at  the  same  time,  if  man  is  made  in  the 
image  of  God,  we  have  some  right  to  form  conceptions 
about  His  nature  from  our  own,  within  due  and 
reverent  limits.  And  if,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  we  are 
wrong  in  this  particular  conception,  and  it  should  at 
length  burst  upon  us  as  true  that  God  is  a  monad, 
a  unit,  but  aware,  before  all  creation,  of  His  own 
existence,  cognisant  of  the  fulness  of  His  powers,  and 
eternally  exercising  a  patei-nal  love,  we  can  only  say 
that  such  a  state  of  things  would  not  only  transcend 
our  experience  and  thought,  but  that  it  would  contra- 
dict it.  Assuming  the  Arian  belief  to  be  true,  nothing 
within  our  reach  leads  us  in  the  direction  of  the  true 
belief,  or  gives  us  any  hint  that  may  afterwards  be 
developed  into  knowledge.  Quite  the  contiwy.  Hard 
though  it  may  be  to  understand  the  Church  doctrine 
of  the  Trinity,  it  is  much  harder  to  conceive  how 
God  could  be  eternally  Love,  if  He  were  a  solitary 
unit. 

§6. 

It  must  not  be  supposed  from  what  we  have  now 
said,  or  from  anything  that  follows,  that  the  belief  in 
the  Holy  Trinity  is  derived  from  abstract  reasonings 
of  men,  who  found  themselves  unsatisfied  by  the 
notion  of  a  God  in  one  person.  On  the  contrary,  it  is 
doubtful  whether  unaided  speculation  would  ever  have 


56     God  eternally  reproduced  to  Himself 


ascertained  the  blessed  truth  which  Christ  has  made 
kno^yn  to  us  concerning  the  nature  of  God.  We 
accept  that  truth  as  graciously  revealed  to  us ;  and  if 
any  of  the  independent  arguments  which  we  use  in 
elucidation  of  it  fail — as  well  they  may — to  carry 
conviction  with  them,  the  revealed  doctrine  remains 
where  it  was,  secure  upon  its  Scriptural  basis.  Never- 
theless, it  is  a  satisfaction,  if,  when  revelation  has 
assured  us  of  the  fact,  we  can  discern  elsewhere  any 
clues  which  might,  if  we  had  observed  them,  have 
guided  us  towards  the  fact. 

We  may,  then,  say  that  unless  we  are  to  take 
refuge  in  supposing  that  God  is  not  self-sufficient,  but 
is  only,  as  Pantheism  fancies,  gradually  coming  to 
know  Himself  by  means  of  the  world,  it  would  appear 
reasonable  to  postulate  that  God  contains  in  His  own 
being  both  subject  and  object.  We  human  beings  find 
ourselves  set  off  by  the  world  of  which  we  form  part ; 
but  we  might  expect  to  find  that  God  is  set  off  to 
Himself  by  something  within  His  own  nature, — that 
He  is  presented  to  His  own  contemplation.  It  may 
be  surmised  that  there  is  some  movement  by  which 
eternally  He  is  reflected  to  Himself.  God,  we  may 
suppose,  must  be  ever  inwardly  projected,  reproduced; 
or  rather  projecting,  reproducing,  Himself;  not  by  a 
succession  of  fresh  reproductions,  for  we  have  no  right 
to  say  that  with  God  there  is  any  succession,  but  by 
one  act  of  reproduction,  complete  and  abiding,  yet  ever 
new,  as  if  the  one  act  were  always  in  the  living  process 
of  being  performed.  Thus  there  would  ever  confront 
Him  somewliat  wliich  is  at  once  Himself  and  not 


in  One  zvho  is  His  equal. 


57 


Himself,  which  He  can  regard  as  embodying  His  own 
whole  being,  while  still  (in  a  sense)  distinct  from,  and 
contrasted  with,  that  which  in  the  first  instance  is 
the  "I,"  the  "Ego,"  of  God. 

But  if  there  is  to  be  such  a  reflexion  of  God  to 
Himself,  the  reflexion  must  needs  be  personal,  m  the 
same  sense  m  which  God  Himself  is  personal.  God 
would  in  no  true  way  be  represented  to  Himself  by  a 
mere  picture  or  image  in  a  mirror,  so  to  speak,  lifeless, 
and  without  power  to  respond  to  Him.  It  is  incon- 
ceivable that  there  should  be  within  the  nature  of 
God  anything  which  is  not  life  ;  and  even  if  it  were 
conceivable,  a  lifeless  image  of  God  would  return  to 
Him,  not  only  an  inadequate,  but  a  totally  false  vision 
of  Himself.  That  which  truly  reproduces  God  must 
be  to  Him,  not  It,"  but  Thou ; "  and  God  in  turn 
must  be  Thou "  to  that  which  reproduces  Him. 
And  if  God  is  truly  to  know  Himself,  the  living  Image 
which  is  before  Him  must  be  in  every  respect  worthy 
of  Him,  that  is,  equal  to  Him.  Any  partial  repre- 
sentation of  God  falls  infinitely  short  of  Him ;  and 
no  number  of  finite  and  partial  representations  could 
mount  up  so  as  to  supply  the  deficiency.  No  part  of 
God's  perfections  and  possibilities  can  at  any  time  be 
absent  from  His  consciousness;  and  they  cannot  be 
present  to  it  in  infinite  detail  without  being  present 
in  their  complete  unity.  Therefore  of  necessity  that 
absolute  reproduction  by  which  God  is  set  before  His 
own  eyes  must  be  God,  because,  otherwise,  God's  self- 
knowledge  would  fall  infinitely  short  of  the  truth. 
Nothing  but  God  can  represent  God. 


58  Need  of  Bo7id  between  Stibject  mtd  Object. 


Thus  we  seem  led  even  by  reason,  apart  from  reve- 
lation, to  entertain  the  thought  of  a  duality  in  the 
Divine  nature.  But  we  are  unable  to  rest  here. 
Although  the  next  step  in  thought  is  less  easy  to 
express  in  words,  the  mind  naturally  demands  a  bond 
between  the  I and  the  "  Thou,"  by  which  they  may 
know  themselves  as  "  I "  and  Thou/'  If  we  have  been 
right  thus  far,  there  is  in  the  Godhead  the  subject  and 
the  object ;  but  how  are  they  related  to  each  other  ? 
Duality  gives  us  only  the  notion  of  separation.  If 
there  were  no  other  movement  in  the  Divine  nature 
but  that  whereby  the  first  Person  projects  Himself 
into  a  second,  the  two  might,  for  all  we  can  see,  be  left 
for  ever  gazing  upon  each  other,  without  knowing  the 
difference  between  themselves,  without  mutual  sym- 
pathy, and  therefore  without  freedom  of  intercourse. 
A  God  whose  nature  was  but  dual  could  hardly,  to  our 
thinking,  rise  to  as  high  a  level  of  intelligence  as 
man's.  There  miglit  be  mutual  observatioji  and  attrac- 
tion ;  but  not  the  consciousness  either  of  antithesis 
or  of  union.  In  order  that  God  may  be  complete  and 
self-sufficing,  we  feel  a  desire  to  see  within  the  unity 
of  His  nature  a  process  -  which  establishes  mutual 
knowledge,  and  along  with  mutual  knowledge  mutual 
love.  We  shall  expect  to  find  the  movement  whereby 
God  places  Himself  before  Himself,  followed  up  by  a 
movement  whereby  He  makes  Himself  fully  known, 
in  all  His  loveableness  and  wisdom,  to  the  object  thus 
set  before  Him,  and  receives  back  the  response  of  that 
object.  And  we  may  perhaps  dimly  apprehend  how 
this  mediation  between  the  Divine    I "  and Tliou '' 


The  Bond  itself  Personal  and  Divine.  59 


should  itself  be  fitly  the  work  of  a  Person.  It  is  not, 
like  will,  or  intelligence,  a  faculty  of  God,  which  can,  in 
thought,  be  detached  from  the  Divine  essence ;  it  is  a 
vital  process  in  the  very  being  of  God,  without  which 
He  cannot  be  conceived  of  as  existing.  It  involves 
nothing  less  than  the  whole  internal  relation  of  God 
to  Himself.  And  as  we  saw  that  the  object  in  which 
God  is  reproduced  to  Himself  must  be  in  all  points 
equal  with  God,  so  the  Person  who  mediates  between 
the  two  must  be  in  all  points  the  equal  of  either,  or 
He  could  not  adequately  interpret  the  one  to  the 
other.  It  seems  to  put  the  completing  touch  to  the 
glory  of  the  Divine  life  when  we  see  Person  and 
Person  eternally  made  known  to  each  other,  in  their 
difference  and  in  their  unity,  by  a  Person  to  whom 
both  are  absolutely  known,  and  who  is  absolutely  one 
with  both. 

§  7' 

Such  guesses  of  the  natural  reason — though  we 
could  not  safely  build  upon  them  without  further 
light — prepare  us  to  receive  with  adoring  reverence 
the  glimpses  of  the  inner  life  of  God  accorded  to  us 
in  Holy  Scripture.  As  might  be  expected,  the  Bible 
speaks  most  often  of  the  active  relations  of  God 
towards  creation,  and  shows  us  what  is  called  by 
theologians  the  "economic"  or  ''practical  Trinity,'' 
that  is,  the  threefold  way  in  which  God  deals  with 
us.  But  here  and  there  we  are  shown  (as  it  were) 
an  opened  heaven,  and  the  Godhead  is  revealed  in  its 
"  essential  Trinity." 


6o      Revelatio7i  of  Eternal  Fatherhood. 


God  is  seen  to  have  been  eternally  and  absolutely 
''the  Father/'  before  time  began.  It  is  not  a  title 
given  to  Him  because,  as  matter  o£  history,  the  life 
of  us  all  can  be  traced  back  to  Him.  That  name 
belongs  to  Him,  not  because  He  always  prospectively 
had  the  capacity,  the  desire,  the  will,  to  become 
Father.  In  the  eternal  days  before  creation  He  was 
actually  Father,  by  the  true  communication  of  all 
His  own  glorious  nature  to  One  who  was  perfect^ 
the  Son."  That  Son's  existence  constitutes  Him 
Father ;  and  it  was  not  when  the  Son  became  incar- 
nate, nor  even  when  the  Son  began  to  .fashion  the 
world,  that  God  acquired  fatherhood  by  Him.  I 
glorified  Thee  upon  the  earth,  having  perfected  the 
work  which  Thou  hast  given  Me  that  I  should  do  ; " 
so  says  the  Incarnate  Son,  looking  back  upon  His 
earthly  life  ;  and  then  He  continues  with  a  lengthen- 
ing retrospect :  And  now  glorify  Thou  Me,  O  Father, 
at  Thine  own  side,  with  the  glory  which  I  had,  before 
that  the  world  was,  beside  Thee (S.  John  xvii.  4,  5). 
Long  before  the  Son  stooped  from  heaven  to  the  task 
of  redemption, — long  before  the  immeasurable  cycles 
began  through  which  ihc  Son  was  framing  the  worlds, 
— God  is  shown  to  us  as  dwelling  in  no  solitary 
grandeur.  One  who  calls  Him  "  Father "  is  in  His 
company,  and  who  establishes  the  trutli  of  the  title 
by  sharing  with  Him  the  full  possession  of  that  glory, 
which  created  tilings  may  see,"  but  none  but  God 
can  ''  have." 

No  less  clear  is  the  witness  of  the  solemn  sen- 
tt'uces  at  the  beginning  of  S.  John's  Gospel.  The 


Revelation  of  the  Wo'/d  as  Eternal.     6 1 


language  is  different,  though  the  Persons  spoken  of 
are  the  same.  The  Son  and  Father,  in  the  glory 
of  Their  common  nature,  are  now  described  as  ''the 
Word "  and  "  God."  "  In  the  beginning  was  the 
Word,  and  the  Word  was  with  God,  and  the  Word 
was  God"  (S.  John  i.  1).  A  word  is  a  thought 
launched  forth  from  the  thinker's  mind,  making  clear 
to  himself  and  to  others  what  he  thinks.  As  the 
name  of  "  Son "  brings  out  more  prominently  the 
notion  of  personality  and  love,  so  that  of  Word " 
brings  out  the  notion  of  ordered  ideas,  distinctly  and 
rationally  perceived.  God  has  not  many  words,  but 
one  Word,  who  is  the  utterance  and  expression  of  the 
whole  mind  and  will  of  God.  And  that  whole  mind 
and  will  of  God  was  already  articulate  and  complete 
before  any  single  act  of  creation  had  taken  place. 
When  creation  began  to  be,  it  found  the  Word  already 
in  existence,  and  it  owed  its  origin  to  His  agency. 
"In  the  beginning  the  Word  was."  But  it  is  not 
enough  for  us  to  know  that  He  "  was."  Had  the 
Evangelist  stopped  here,  we  should  have  been  free 
to  fancy  that  the  Word  was  but  some  faculty  or 
element  in  the  person  of  God  the  Father.  But  he 
proceeds  to  teach  us  the  mystery  of  a  second  personal 
subsistence  in  active  relation  to  the  first :  "  And  the 
Word  was  with  God."  The  preposition  is  not  the 
same  as  that  employed  in  the  last  passage  under 
consideration.  There  the  Son  was  shown  to  us  in 
simple  juxtaposition  with  the  Father.  They  were 
together,  in  the  presence  of  each  other.  Here  we  have 
a  further  thought.     Two  may  be  together  without 


62  Eternal  Fellozvship  of  the  Word  with  God. 


taking  notice  of  each  other;  but  this  preposition 
shows  us,  if  we  may  say  so,  the  attitude  of  the  second 
Person  to  the  first.  Quite  literally  it  is,  "And  the 
Word  was  towards  God."  His  face  is  not  outwards, 
so  to  speak,  as  if  He  were  merely  revealing,  or  wait- 
ino"  to  reveal,  God  to  the  creation.  His  face  is 
inwards.  His  whole  person  is  directed  towards  God, 
motion  corresponding  to  motion,  thought  to  thought. 
He  appears  to  find  His  very  being  in  the  intensity 
of  bliss  with  which  He  receives  all  that  passes  in  the 
mind  and  heart  of  God.  In  Him  God  stands  revealed 
to  Himself  in  all  the  inexhaustible  possibilities  of  His 
wisdom.  And  lest  it  should  for  a  moment  appear  as 
if  this  perfect  revelation  could  be  found  in  some  being 
shot  forth  outside  the  Divine  life  itself,  of  lower  nature 
than  that  of  Him  who  is  revealed,  the  Apostle  adds, 
"  And  the  Word  was  God."  The  self -revelation  is 
completed  within  the  unity  of  the  Godhead  by  the 
mutual  knowledge  and  love  of  more  than  one  Person. 

So  again,  to  take  one  more  instance,  another 
Apostle  opens  to  us  a  view  of  the  eternal  place  of  the 
Holy  Ghost  within  the  life  of  God,  apart  from  the 
created  universe.  "The  Spirit  searcheth  all  things, 
even  the  depths  of  God  For  who  of  men  knoweth 
the  things  of  the  man  save  the  spirit  of  the  man 
which  is  in  him  ?  So  also  the  things  of  God  none 
hath  known  save  the  Spirit  of  God  "  (1  Cor.  ii.  10, 11). 
The  spirit  of  the  man  is  his  own  ultimate  conscious- 
ness, whereby  he  knows  about  himself  what  no  one 
else  can  know  unless  he  chooses  to  tell  it.  So  also 
the  Spirit  of  God  is  the  ultimate  consciousness  of 


Place  of  the  Sph'it  in  Ete^mal  Godhead.  63 

God,  whereby  He  knows  Himself.  That  Spirit  is  not 
merely  an  emanation  from  the  Divine  nature,  working 
upon  the  world,  but  a  movement  within  the  Divine 
nature,  returning  upon  itself.  The  distinctness  of  the 
Spirit's  person  is  not,  indeed,  so  clearly  brought  out 
here  as  elsewhere ;  for  if  this  passage  stood  alone,  we 
might  even,  perhaps,  have  pressed  too  far  the  analogy 
of  the  place  of  the  Spirit  in  the  Divine  subject  and  in 
the  human.  But  all  the  more  unmistakeably  this 
passage  teaches  that  the  Spirit  is  of  the  very  essence 
of  the  God  whose  Spirit  He  is,  so  one  with  Him  that 
God  cannot  be  imagined  without  Him.  His  perfect 
Deity  is  testified  to  by  the  infinite  reach  and  range  of 
His  activity.  The  spirit  of  man  has  but  a  limited 
knowledge  of  the  things  of  the  man,  and  there  are 
mysteries  in  his  nature  and  character  and  career 
which  he  cannot  now  explore,  and  perhaps  never  will 
be  able.  But  the  Spirit  of  God  finds  nothing  even  in 
God  which  baffles  His  scrutiny.  His  "  searcTi  "  is  not 
a  seeking  for  knowledge  yet  beyond  Him  \  it  is  a 
penetrating,  comprehensive  cognisance  oi  all  that  is 
in  God,  even  to  the  depths.  If  the  act  of  search 
reveals  a  personal  consciousness  in  the  Spirit,  the 
extent  of  the  search  involves  His  true  Godhead. 
Nothing  but  God  could  search  the  depths  of  God. 

§  8. 

The  manner  of  the  unity  of  the  Three  blessed 
Persons  is,  and  we  may  well  think  that  it  must  always 
be,  beyond  the  reach  of  our  intelligence,  although  it 
cannot  be  contradictory  to  our  reason.    The  only 


64  The  Name  ^'God''  applied  to  the  Father  only. 


approach  which  we  can  make  to  a  right  understanding 
of  what  is  revealed  Kes  in  the  doctrine  of  the  deriva- 
tion of  the  Son  and  Spirit  from  the  person  of  the 
Father.  Even  careful  divines  are  not  always  free 
from  ambiguity  on  this  point.  Sometimes,  from  their 
language,  the  learner  might  imagine  that  there  was 
something  still  in  the  background,  in  which  Father, 
Son,  and  Spirit  alike  have  the  foundation  of  Their 
being.  One  might  fancy  that  they  spoke,  (somewhat 
like  the  Sabellians)  of  one  called  "God,"  behind  the 
Three  Persons  in  which  He  is  known  or  of  which  He 
is  composed ;  or  of  an  abstract  substance  called  "  the 
Godhead,''  wholly  entering,  indeed,  into  all  Three 
Persons,  but  in  thought  separable  from  all  Three. 

Such  a  conception  would  be  contrary  to  the 
language  of  Scripture.  In  the  New  Testament  the 
nape  "God"— "God"  as  a  Name,  "God"  with 
the  definite  article  and  nothing  else  (6  Geoc) — is 
absolutely  identified  with  the  Person  of  the  Father. 
It  is  never  used  of  the  Son  or  of  the  Spirit.  It  is 
never  used  of  the  blessed  Trinity  in  general,  without 
person  specified.  While  "  tlic  Lord  '  most  frequently 
denotes  the  Son,  but  sometimes  the  Father  (S.  James 
iii.  9,  KV.),  sometimes  the  Spirit  (2  Cor.  iii.  17,  18), 
"  God  "  is  always  the  Father.  "  To  us  there  is  but 
one  God,  the  Father  "  (1  Cor.  viii.  6).  Whenever  the 
word  is  used  of  the  Son  or  of  the  Spirit,  it  is  used  as 
a  predicate,  or  with  some  descriptive  and  quaUfying 
addition.  "  My  Lord  and  my  God  "  (S.  John  xx.  28). 
"  TliQ  blessed  hope  and  appearing  of  the  glory  of  our 
great  God  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ"  (Titus  ii.  13). 


The  Father  the  sole  Fountain  of  all  Being,  65 


The  Word  was  with  God  (Trpoc  roir  Geor),  and  the 
Word  (Geoc  nv)  was  God"  (S.  John  i.  2).  "Christ, 
who  is  over  all,  God  blessed  for  ever''^  (Rom.  ix.  5). 
The  Son  is  God,  but  God  is  not  the  Son.  The  Spirit 
is  God,  but  God  is  not  the  Spirit.  The  Father  is  God, 
and  God  is  the  Father.  We  can  speak  of  God  and 
His  Son ;  we  could  never  speak  of  God  and  His 
Father. 

Thus  the  unity  of  God  is  not  to  be  looked  for  in 
the  bare  notion  of  a  community  of  "  substance " 
between  the  Three  Divine  Persons.  Unity  of  sub- 
stance would  not  of  itself  exclude  Tritheism,  any 
more  than  it  excludes  the  notion  of  multitude  among 
us  men,  who  all  share  the  same  "  substance  "  and  yet 
are  independent  units.  God's  unity  is  to  be  found  in 
the  relation  of  the  Son  and  Spirit  with  the  Father, 
from  whom  They  derive.  The  Father— God — is  the 
sole  Fountain  of  all  being,  uncreated  as  well  as 
created.  The  well-spring  of  His  life  is  not  in  some 
abstract  "  Godhead beyond  Him  ;  it  is  in  Himself. 
The  well-spring  of  the  life  of  the  Son  and  Spirit  is 
not  in  Themselves,  but  in  Him.  There  is  a  sense, 
indeed,  in  which  They  "  have  life  in  Themselves ; '' 
but  They  have  it  in  Themselves  by  "  gift  "  from  Him 
(S.  John  V.  26).  Not  that,  like  creatures,  They  live  by 
a  gift  that  might  have  been  withheld — by  a  fiat  of 
His  will.  They  are  necessary  to  the  very  notion  of 
God.  The  Father  would  not  be  Himself  without 
Them ;  God  would  not  be  the  God  He  is.  And  yet 
the  existence  of  the  Father — of  God,  that  is — does  not 
depend  upon  the  Son  and  Spirit  in  the  same  way  as 

F 


66       Stib ordination  of  Son  and  Spirit, 


Theirs  depends  upon  Him,  The  Father  is  made  of 
none,  neither  created,  nor  begotten/'  and,  it  might  be 
added,  "  nor  proceeding."  On  the  other  hand, I  live," 
said  our  Lord,  not  speaking  of  His  human  life  only — 
"  I  live  because  of  the  Father  "  (S.  John  vi.  57). 

So  the  equality  of  the  Son  and  Spirit  with  the 
Father  is  not  a  dead  parity.  "  In  this  Trinity  none 
is  afore  or  after  another,"  indeed,  in  point  of  time,  for 
"  the  whole  Three  Persons  are  co-eternal  together ; " 
there  never  was  a  moment  when  God  was  incomplete, 
as  He  would  have  been  without  Son  or  Spirit.  "  None 
is  greater  or  less  than  another,"  in  point  of  nature, 
attributes,  or  character,  for  "  the  whole  Three  Persons 
are  co-equal ; "  God  would  be  still  incomplete  if  Son 
or  Spirit  were  not  in  everything  "  such  as  the  Father 
is."  And  yet  the  ancient  Greek  teachers  made  no 
mistake  of  doctrine  when  they  interpreted  the  saying 
of  our  Lord,  "  The  Father  is  greater  than  I "  (S.  John 
xiv.  28),  to  refer  to  the  Father  and  the  Son  in  Their 
eternal  relations,  not  to  the  humiliation  of  the  Son 
in  the  days  of  His  flesh.  The  very  fact  of  the  com- 
parison being  made  points,  as  they  observe,  to  the 
identity  of  nature  in  the  Two ;  but  it  reveals  clearly 
the  subordination  of  the  second  Person  to  the  first. 
That  subordination  in  no  way  involves  (as  perhaps  an 
unguarded  use  of  the  word  might  suggest)  a  posi- 
tion for  the  Son  resembling  that  of  the  creatures ;  for 
we  are  to  "  honour  the  Son  even  as  we  honour  the 
Father"  (S.  John  v.  23) ;  but  within  the  imapproach- 
able  Godhead  the  Son  takes  the  second  place,  not  the 
first.    He  is  "  equal  to  the  Father  as  touching  His 


Sttbordination  consistent  with  Equality,  67 


Godhead,"  but  He  is  inferior  to  the  Father/'  not  only 
"  as  touching  His  manhood/'  but  also  as  touching  His 
Sonship.  There  is  nothing  in  the  Father  which  He 
does  not  bestow  upon  the  Son  by  the  very  act  of 
begetting  Him,  for  fatherhood  is  the  transmission  to 
another  of  the  parent's  own  nature ;  but  there  is 
nothing  in  the  Son  which  He  does  not  owe  to  the 
Father.  He  has  no  initiative  of  His  own,  either  in 
thought  or  in  action ;  nor  has  the  Holy  Ghost.  The 
Son's  life  is  a  life  of  eternal  obedience,  which  makes 
up  its  joy.     The  Father  alone  has  the  initiative. 

The  Son  can  do  nothing  of  Himself,  except  He  seeth 
the  Father  doing  it"  (S.  John  v.  19).  "As  I  hear,  I 
judge"  (ver.  30).  **'The  Spirit  of  truth  shall  guide 
you  unto  all  the  truth ;  for  He  shall  not  speak  from 
Himself,  but  whatsoever  He  shall  hear,  that  shall  He 
speak"  (S.  John  xvi.  13). 

Nor  may  we  think  that  in  this  way  the  power  or 
wisdom  of  the  Son  and  Spirit  is  limited.  Not  at  all ; 
these  words  only  explain  the  mode  and  condition  of 
Their  limitless  thought  and  action ;  and  they  are  fol- 
lowed up  by  sayings  like  these  :  "  What  things  soever 
He  " — the  Father — "  doeth,  these  the  Son  also  doeth 
in  like  manner ;  for  the  Father  loveth  the  Son,  and 
showeth  Him  all  things  that  Himself  doeth  "  (S.  John 
v.  19).  And  again,  "All  things  that  the  Father  hath 
are  Mine ;  therefore  said  I  that  He " — the  Spirit  of 
truth — "  taketh  of  Mine,  and  shall  show  it  unto  you  " 
(S.  John  xvi.  15).  There  is  but  one  cogTiition  in  the 
Divine  Being,  although  the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the 
Spirit  partake  in  the  cognition  in  different  ways. 


68         Unity  of  Will  in  the  Trinity. 


There  is  but  one  movement  of  will  in  whatever  the 
blessed  Trinity  wills,  although  each  o£  the  Three  joins 
in  the  movement  of  will  in  a  manner  peculiar  to  Him- 
self. Whatever  any  one  of  the  Trinity  does,  the  act  is 
common  to  all  the  Trinity,  although  each  does  it  in  a 
mode  incommunicable  to  the  other  Two. 

This  it  is  which  makes,  we  may  saj^-,  the  true 
oneness  of  the  Eternal  Trinity.  God  is  Love ;  and 
the  union  of  the  Three  is  not  one  of  barren  necessity. 
It  is  a  free  and  living  union,  in  which  all  are  bound 
together  by  an  absolute  outpouring  of  each  to  other 
in  love.  We  may  think  of  the  joy  which  the  Father 
has  in  giving, — in  communicating  without  reserve,  to 
the  Son,  "all  the  fulness"  (Col.  i.  19)  of  His  being, 
draining  Himself,  to  the  very  last  ray  of  glory,  to 
bestow  it  all  on  Him,  and  finding  it  all  the  more  His 
own  because  lavished  freely  on  the  Only  Begotten. 
And  it  is  the  joy  of  the  Son  to  receive, — to  feel  the 
infinite  flow  of  the  Fathers  love  concentrated  in 
Himself ;  and,  in  the  gratitude  which  must  always  be 
a  part  of  filial  love,  we  may  understand,  to  some 
extent,  the  gladness  with  which  He  welcomes  most 
those  wishes  of  the  Father  which  will  cost  most  to 
Himself,  the  pure  pride  with  which  He  reflects  that 
He  mixes  nothing  of  His  own  with  what  the  Father 
give«  Him.  The  Spirit  likewise  has  His  joy  in 
making  known, — in  perfecting  fellowship  and  keeping 
the  eternal  love  alive  by  that  incessant  sounding  of 
the  deeps  which  makes  the  heart  of  the  Father  known 
to  tlie  Son,  and  the  heart  of  the  Son  to  the  Father. 
None  of  the  Three  adorable  Persons  has,  or  ever  had. 


Moral  Aspect  of  the  Divine  Unity.  69 


or  ever  could  have,  or  ever  could  wish  to  have,  any- 
thing of  His  own,  peculiar  to  Himself,  not  common  to 
the  whole  Trinity, — except,  of  course,  that  special 
relationship  to  the  others  which  constitutes  His  dis- 
tinctive personality.  It  is  the  glory  of  Them  all  to  be 
One,  not  by  a  mere  metaphysical  identity  of  nature, 
but  also  (if  we  may  dare  to  say  so)  by  a  moral  living 
for  and  in  each  other,  in  a  mutual  devotion  such  as 
serves  as  an  example  for  men.  "  The  glory  which 
Thou  hast  given  Me  I  have  given  them ;  that  they 
may  be  one,  even  as  We  are  one."  "That  they  all 
may  be  one,  even  as  Thou,  Father,  art  in  Me,  and  I 
in  Thee,  that  they  also  may  be  in  Us  "  (S.  John  xvii. 
22,  21). 


Chapter  III. 

The  Christian  doctrine  of  O'eation  contrasted  with  Pantheism — Gods 
Ptcrpose  in  Creation — The  Christian  doctrine  contrasted  with  Deism 
— Source  of  Creation  in  the  Eternal  Word — Immaiience  of  the  Word 
as  a  principle  of  Order — Doctri7ie  of  the  Angels — Science  and  Reve- 
latioji — The  Alosaic  account  of  Creation  as  a  progressive  Work — 
Ma7i  the  croivn  of  Creation. 

§  1- 

The  doctrine  of  the  Holy  Trinity  leads  in  two  direc- 
tions to  a  true  view  o£  Creation.  In  the  first  place, 
by  helping  us  to  see  that  God  is  independent  of  all 
external  to  Himself,  and  that  He  already  has  within 
Himself  all  that  He  needs,  for  life,  for  consciousness, 
for  love,  for  bliss,  it  makes  us  perceive  that  Creation 
is  indeed  Creation.  The  world  had  once  a  definite 
beginning ;  at  the  first  beat  of  time  it  sprang  into  a 
course  of  historical  existence.  And  the  act  of  Creation 
is  one  of  pure  free-will.  There  was  no  outward  com- 
pulsion upon  God  to  create ;  no  blind  instinct  from 
within  impelled  Him  to  do  it,  without  His  knowing 
why.  It  produced  no  change  in  His  internal  life 
He  liad  ever  been  exactly  what  He  is  now  and  ever 
will  be,  world  without  end.    No  new  powers  came 


No  Pantheistic  Confiision  zuith  the  Wo7'ld,  71 


to  Him  through  the  action,  nor  was  He  feehng  His 
way  to  a  more  vivid  sense  of  life.  The  unique 
language  used  by  S.  James,  apparently,  of  the  second 
creation,  applies  also  to  the  first,  when  he  says, 
"  Because  it  liked  Him  {^ov\y\%dq)  " — -or  rather,  by 
an  act  of  liking  " — He  brought  us  forth  by  a  word 
of  truth  '\  (S.  James  i.  18).  He  knew  what  He  was 
about,  and  He  need  never  have  created  had  He  not 
chosen  to  do  so  ;  it  was  an  exhibition  of  His  sovereign 
and  irresponsible  pleasure.  And  that  which  He 
created  forms  no  part  of  Himself.  However  closely 
the  Creator  may  connect  Himself  with  His  creature 
there  is  no  passing  of  the  one  into  the  other.  Though 
God,  the  Father  of  all,  is  through  all  "  and  in  all," 
nevertheless  He  is  above  all "  (Eph.  iv.  6).  He 
stands  well  off  from  the  world,  and  the  world  from 
Him  ;  and  although  it  is  His  continual  presence  in  all 
things  which  sustains  them  in  being,  and  without 
Him  they  could  not  be,  yet  they  are  not  mere  phantom 
existences,  wonderful  puppets  playing  in  His  fancy 
and  made  conscious  of  their  own  and  others'  playing ; 
but  He  has  given  to  them  a  real  substantive  being  of 
their  own,  a  true  creaturely  dignity  which  the  Creator 
Himself  respects.  Thus  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity 
frees  us  from  the  confusions  of  Pantheism,  by  which 
in  one  way  or  another  God  and  the  world  are  mixed 
together  and  identified. 

§  2. 

The  motive  of  God  in  creation  was  undouotedly 
benevolent.     As  S.  Athanasius  says,     He  gi'udged 


72  GocTs  Purpose  in  Creating 


existence  to  nothing."  I£  we  are  the  handiwork  of 
God,  we  are  the  handiwork  of  love.  God  made  us 
because  He  wished  to  do  us  good,  and  had  a  magnifi- 
cent "  purpose  "  for  us  in  view.  Knowing  the  wealth 
of  wisdom  and  beauty  and  love  that  was  in  Himself 
and  His  Son  and  Holy  Ghost,  He  could  not  refrain 
from  sharing  the  pure  enjoyment  of  it  with  beings 
other  than  Himself.  In  this  sense  we  may  even  say 
that  God's  nature  compelled  Him  to  create,  for  had  He 
not  done  so,  a  love  could  have  been  imagined  more 
perfect  than  was  displayed.  At  least  it  was  becoming 
for  a  perfect  love  to  create,  and  what  becomes  Him, 
God  does.  Acute  thinkers,  indeed,  like  John  Stuart 
Mill,  have  doubted  whether  benevolence  towards  His 
creatures  was  the  sole  or  the  main  purpose  in  the 
Creator's  mind.  Mill's  reason  for  the  doubt  was  the 
incidental  misery  and  pain  in  nature ;  but  he  should 
have  seen  that  benevolence  is  very  different  from  love. 
Love  is  prepared  to  take  deeper  and  sterner  measures 
than  benevolence,  which  is,  by  itself,  a  shallow  thing, 
it  may,  however,  be  conceded  that  the  creation  of  the 
world  is  not  due  to  a  love  which  has  no  other  object 
besides  the  world.  We  are  plainly  told  in  one  passage 
that  all  things  exist,  not  only  by  means  of  the  Father, 
but  "for  His  sake"  (Heb.  ii.  10,  g^' Sv).  As  plainly, 
though  in  a  somewliat  different  form,  we  are  told  that 
all  things  have  been  created  by  means  of  the  Son 
of  God's  love,  "  and  with  a  view  to  Him"  (Col.  i.  16, 
ttc  avTov).  And  again,  in  an  ascription  where  it  is 
difficult  to  tell  whether  the  Father  or  the  Son  is 
meant,  we  read,    For  out  of  Him,  and  by  means 


His  own  Glory  and  Love  of  the  CreaHtrc.  73 


of  Him,  and  with  a  view  to  Him,  are  all  things" 
(Rom.  xi.  36,  avrov).  Assuredly  God  created  us 
for  His  own  glory.  We  are  instruments  for  the  mani- 
festation of  His  character.  But  the  two  ends  are  one 
and  the  same.  If  the  Father  created  the  world  to 
give  it  as  a  kingdom  to  the  Son  of  His  love,  over 
which  the  Son  might  reign  as  its  Firstborn,  and  if  the 
Son  did  His  part  in  the  creation  in  order  to  reveal  by 
it  the  glory  of  His  Father,  the  interests  of  the  world 
itself  were  in  no  wise  neglected,  nor  could  they  be. 
The  true  glory  of  God  could  never  have  been  revealed 
through  a  world  for  which  He  did  not  care.  There 
might  have  been  an  exhibition  of  skill  and  might,  but 
not  of  love,  and  love — wise  and  righteous  love — is  the 
true  glory  of  God.  The  more  God  loves  the  world, 
the  more  deeply  must  He  reveal  Himself  to  it ;  and 
this,  so  far  as  we  can  see.  He  could  never  have  done 
in  a  government  of  mere  benevolence,  from  which  all 
pain  and  suffering  were  excluded.  Nor  can  we  shut 
off  the  second  creation  from  the  first ;  and  the  second 
creation  leaves  no  room  to  doubt  our  Maker  s  motive. 
The  Father  and  the  Son  glorify  each  other,  and  the 
Holy  Spirit  glorifies  both,  by  vying  as  it  were  with 
each  other  to  exhibit  the  love  which  each  bears  to  the 
world.  It  was  an  act  of  self-sacrifice  when  God 
vouchsafed  to  give  birth  to  a  free  universe;  and  in 
proportion  to  the  depths  of  the  self-sacrifice  was  the 
joy  which  attended  it.  "  The  glory  of  the  Lord — 
that  display  of  His  love  for  which  we  were  created — 
"  shall  endure  for  ever  :  the  Lord  shall  rejoice  in  His 
works"  (Ps.  civ.  31), 


74  No  Deistic  Sepm^ation 


%  3. 

At  the  same  time  as  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity 
frees  us  from  Pantheism,  it  frees  us  also  from  the 
difficulties  of  the  opposite  error  of  Deism.  Deism 
(along  with  modern  Judaism  and  Islam)  not  only 
puts  a  great  chasm  between  the  world,  as  at  present 
existing,  and  its  Maker,  but  it  offers  no  help  towards 
understanding  how  the  world  ever  came  to  be  made 
at  all.  The  problem,  when  seriously  considered,  is 
by  no  means  an  easy  one.  All  the  early  Gnostic 
systems  sprang  out  of  a  desire  to  solve  it.  However 
a  Supreme  Being — presumed  to  be  a  unit — could 
suddenly  find  himself  with  a  material  world  under 
his  hand,  the  Gnostic  thinkers  could  not  divine ;  nor 
can  any  one  else.  The  contrast,  they  saw,  was  too 
violent.  Flights  of  emanations  and  8eons  were 
imagined,  each  in  succession  coming  lower,  until  one 
had  been  produced — at  a  great  distance  from  the 
abstract  and  absolute  God — debased  enough  to  be 
what  was  called  the  Demiurge,  or  the  common  World- 
maker.  Gnosticism,  however,  was  wrong  on  two 
cardinal  points.  It  was  wrong  in  considering  the 
world  unworthy  to  be  the  work  of  the  Most  High  ; 
and  it  did  not  see  (any  more  than  Arianism)  that  the 
very  noblest  of  emanations  must,  in  fact,  stand  as 
far  beneath  the  absolute  God  as  any  weed  or  stone. 
In  trying  to  express  the  distance  between  God  and 
the  world,  it  did,  in  fact,  bring  God  hopelessly  down  ; 
for  the  notion  of  any  sort  of  demigod  can  only  be 
entertained  by  those  whose  thoughts  of  God  are  low. 


between  God  and  the  World.  75 


The  real  difference  comes  in  between  God  and  what 
is  not  God.  The  things  which  are  not  God  may 
rightly  be  compared  among  themselves,  and  may  be 
arranged  in  a  true  hierarchy;  but  when  compared 
with  God  Himself,  one  thing  bears  the  comparison  no 
better  than  another.  Nothing  created  can,  in  reality, 
fill  the  gap,  and  the  Gnostic  fabrications  leave  but 
a  form  of  Deism  after  all.  The  only  doctrine  which 
affords  any  true  help  towards  connecting  God  and  the 
world  is  that  same  Christian  doctrine  of  the  Trinity 
which  makes  so  sharp  a  difference  between  them. 

§  4. 

The  teaching  of  Holy  Scripture  concerning  the 
Logos,  or  Word  of  God,  has  already  been  touched 
upon.  Whatever  were  the  sources,  Alexandrine  or 
Palestinian,  to  which  S.  John's  language  is  histori- 
cally to  be  traced,  we  see  in  the  prologue  to  his 
Gospel  the  truth  which  gives  the  starting-point  for 
creation.  God  is  no  sterile  and  motionless  unit.  He 
has  from  all  eternity  within  Himself  a  rich  fulness  of 
life  and  thought,  in  which  His  whole  heart  finds 
a  satisfying  exercise.  This  fulness  of  His  life  and 
thought  is  in  the  Word,  and  inseparable  from  the 
Word,  so  that,  on  the  one  hand,  no  thought  or  move- 
ment of  will  can  take  place  in  God  without  taking 
place  through  the  Word,  nor,  on  the  other  hand,  can 
the  Word  ever  have  been  an  empty,  meaningless  word, 
destitute  of  that  fulness  of  life  and  thought.  God 
cannot  be  conceived  of  as  having  at  any  time  been 
silent  and  mute  towards  Himself,  holding  no  converse 


76   Ideal  Pre-existence  of  Things  in  the  Word. 


with  Himself;  but  this  converse  He  does  and  must 
hold  by  His  Word,  which  is  at  once  spoken  and 
speaking.  The  Word  is  spoken,  inasmuch  as  the 
thought  is  not  primarily  the  Word's  own  thought,  but 
springs  out  of  God.  The  Word  is  speaking,  inasmuch 
as  the  thought  is  appropriated  by  a  true  personal 
energy  in  the  Word  that  is  spoken,  and  is  returned  in 
its  fulness  to  Him  who  spoke  it,  by  means  of  that 
Spirit  in  whom  God  and  His  Word  are  joined.  It 
seems  probable  that  "  Word,"  spoken  and  speaking, 
more  truly  represents  the  biblical  conception  of  the 
Logos "  than  the  more  technical  term  Reason.'' 
Word is  a  larger  conception  than  that  of  "  Reason." 
It  gives  a  more  objective  reality  to  the  Logos,  as 
truly  uttered,  and  standing  in  a  certain  sense  outside 
of  Him  who  utters  it.  And  at  the  same  time  the 
thought  of  the  Word  "  includes  all  that  the  narrower 
term  contains.  Speech  is  not  possible  without  reason. 
The  Word,  therefore,  is  the  summing  up  and,  if  the 
metaphor  may  be  allowed,  the  precipitation  of  all 
the  infinite  multiplicity  of  the  thoughts  of  God,  in 
a  harmonious  and  logical  perfection.  That  inex- 
haustible wealth  of  ideas  which  God  possesses  does 
not  float  vaguely  and  disconnectedly — in  solution,  so 
to  speak — through  His  mind  ;  but,  in  His  Word,  it  is 
formed  into  a  true  cosmos,  an  ordered  kingdom,  an 
ever-replenished  and  perfectly  arranged  living  treasure- 
house,  which  the  Holy  Ghost  eternally  uses  in  every 
part  for  the  refection  of  the  Father  and  the  Son. 
The  act  by  which  the  Father  begets  the  Son  is  the 
act  l)y  which  He  gains  the  true  grasp  of  His  thought; 


The  Word  the    Beginning  of  the  Creation!'  77 


and,  conversely,  the  process  by  which  He  realises  the 
total  fertility  of  His  resources,  gives  birth  to  Him  who 
is  "God  Only-born"  (S.  John  i.  18,  the  true  reading 
and  translation). 

Thus  it  is  that  the  Eternal  Son  is  "  the  Beginning 
of  the  creation  of  God"  (Rev.  iii.  14),  not  as  being 
the  first  thing  created,  but  as  being  the  deep  principle 
by  which  any  creation  becomes  possible.  By  Him 
all  things  were  made."  His  everlasting  birth  is  the 
first  step  towards  creation.  Among  the  glorious 
thoughts  which  were  included  before  all  time  in  the 
revelation  of  God  to  Himself  in  the  Word,  was  the 
thought  of  an  universe  of  things.  He  perceived  Him- 
self able  to  give  existence  to  something  which  should 
be  not  God.  The  image  of  a  whole  world  of  various 
beings,  linked  together  in  a  wonderful  order,  and  all 
looking  to  Him  as  their  Author,  was  ever  present  to 
His  mind.  That  "  manifold  wisdom "  (Eph.  iii.  10), 
which  has  been  historically  displayed  in  the  world 
and  the  Church,  was  already  present  as  an  "  eternal 
purpose  in  Christ  Jesus  our  Lord."  In  a  tranquil 
and  natural  manner  the  author  of  the  Book  of 
Proverbs  runs  on  describing  the  activities  of  Wisdom 
— which  is  one  aspect  of  the  Word — before  and  in 
creation,  as  if  he  had  scarcely  observed  the  difference. 
"  The  Lord  possessed  Me  in  the  beginning  of  His  way, 
before  His  works  of  old.  I  was  set  up  from  everlast- 
ing, from  the  beginning,  or  ever  the  earth  was. 
When  there  were  no  depths,  I  was  brought  forth ; 
when  there  were  no  fountains  abounding  with  water. 
Before  the  mountains  were  settled,  before  the  hills, 


78     Relation  of  "  Wisdom to  Creation. 


was  I  brought  forth :  while  as  yet  He  had  not  made 
the  earth,  nor  the  fields,  nor  the  highest  part  of  the 
dust  of  the  world."  Thus  far  Wisdom  is  speaking  of 
Her  part  in  the  uncreated  world.  Without  Her  the 
"  works  "  cannot  be  planned ;  but  in  Her  they  clearly 
are  present  as  possibilities,  and  as  intended  to  be 
produced.  They  are  already  contemplated  as  true 
ideas,  before  they  become  outward  realities.  Though 
not  yet  made,  they  are  ready  and  waiting  to  be  made. 
But  the  point  of  transition  is  scarcely  marked,  as  the 
Speaker  continues,  "  When  He  prepared  the  heavens, 
I  was  there :  when  He  set  a  compass  upon  the  face 
of  the  depth  :  when  He  established  the  clouds  above  : 
when  He  strengthened  the  fountains  of  the  deep: 
when  He  gave  to  the  sea  His  decree,  that  the  waters 
should  not  pass  His  commandment :  when  He  ap- 
pointed the  foundations  of  the  earth :  then  I  was  by 
Him,  as  one  brought  up  with  Him :  and  I  was  daily 
His  delight,  rejoicing  always  before  Him,  rejoicing  in 
the  habitable  part  of  His  earth ;  and  My  delights  were 
with  the  sons  of  men  "  (Prov.  viii.  22 — 31). 

The  thoughts  of  God,  as  they  confront  Him  in  the 
Eternal  World,  are  not  mere  imaginations ;  they  have 
a  true,  though  not  yet  a  separate,  existence.  And  so 
the  view  which  is  implicitly  contained  in  Solomon's 
praise  of  Wisdom  is  twice  set  before  us  in  so  many 
words  in  the  New  Testament,  though  hidden  from 
the  ordinary  English  reader  behind  inferior  readings 
and  punctuations.  There  can  be  little  doubt  that  we 
ought,  in  S.  John's  prologue,  to  read,  "That  which 
hath  been  made  was  life  in  Him"  (S.  John  i.  3,  4). 


Creation  not  making  out  of  Nothing.  79 


There  was  no  sudden  and  violent  apparition  of  a  world 
unthought  of  before  and  unprepared  for.  Before  it 
came  into  a  separate  existence  of  its  own,  that  world, 
which  we  now  observe  as  having  begun  to  be,  was 
already  to  be  found,  completely  thought  out,  in  the 
fulness  of  the  life  of  the  Word.  To  God  it  already 
%ms.  It  was  not  strictly  made  of  nothing.  It  did 
not  come  out  of  a  dead  nonentity,  for  already  it  "  was 
life  in  the  Word.'^ 

In  the  Apocalypse  the  same  thought  is  once  more 
expressed.  When  the  elders  shall  at  last  witness  the 
completed  adoration  of  the  four  living  things  which 
symbolize  the  animated  creation,  they  will,  it  says, 
fall  down  before  God,  saying,  "  Worthy  art  Thou,  our 
Lord  and  our  God,  to  receive  the  glory  and  the  honour 
and  the  power :  for  Thou  didst  create  all  things,  and 
because  of  Thy  will  they  were,  and  were  created" 
(Rev.  iv.  11).  Origen  was,  indeed,  wrong  when  he 
spoke  of  creation  as  an  eternal  fact,  like  the  genera- 
tion of  the  Son,  but  only  because  he  confounded  the 
two  modes  of  existence  together,  and  so  lost  the  true 
beginning  of  the  world.  '^All  things  were"  because 
they  were  present  to  the  mind  of  God  in  His  Word. 
It  was  not  by  any  necessity  that  they  were  there,  but 
"  because  of  His  will."  The  thought  of  God  is  free. 
But  God  was  not  content  to  have  them  exist  solely  to 
His  own  consciousness.  In  His  love  and  condescension 
He  gave  them  being,  and,  when  it  pleased  Him,  "  they 
were  created."  At  a  word  they  sprang  from  the  womb 
of  His  thought  into  an  actual  life  of  their  own. 


8o    Immanence  of  the  Wo7'd  in  all  Things. 


§5. 

As  before  time  the  ideas  of  things  contained  in  the 
Word  were  ranged  in  due  order,  so  it  was  also  in  the 
actual  production  of  the  things.  They  did  not  issue 
forth,  all  ready-made  at  once,  and  at  haphazard ;  nor 
were  the  materials  thrown  out  to  fashion  themselves 
for  themselves  as  best  they  might.  The  Word,  in 
whom  they  had  been  life  before,  was  still  present  as 
their  guiding  principle.  Not  only  were  "  all  things 
made  through  Him,"  but "  apart  from  Him  was  nothing 
made,  no  not  one"  (S.  John  i.  3).  His  immanence, 
that  is,  was  felt,  pervading  all,  sustaining  all,  or 
"  bearing  the  universe  along  by  the  utterance  of  His 
power  "  (Heb.  i.  3),  and  giving  unity  and  system  to 
all ;  for  "  in  Him  the  universe  consists,"  or  "  holds 
together"  (Col.  i.  17).  The  invariable  sequences  of 
nature,  the  regularity  and  method  of  all  her  pro- 
cesses, the  uniformity  with  which  she  works,  the 
adaptation  of  things  to  their  environment,  the  laws 
of  gravitation,  the  laws  of  number  and  geometry, 
and  all  the  mysteries  which  science  developes  and 
explores,  above  all,  the  progress  and  rise  which  have 
been  observed  both  in  the  world  and  in  man — inex- 
plicable if  there  were  no  Divine  power  behind  them — 
are  expressions  of  the  presence  of  that  Word,  or 
Wisdom,  which  "  reacheth  from  one  end  to  another,' 
both  in  time  and  space, "  mightily  and  sweetly  ordering 
all  things"  (Wisd.  viii.  1),  and  making  all  nature  to 
be  a  visible  word  of  God — a  true,  though  partial, 
revelation  of  His  mind. 


Angels  the  first  created  Beings.  8i 


§6. 

Holy  Scripture  would  lead  us  to  suppose  that  the 
material  heavens  and  earth  were  not  the  first  product 
of  the  creative  energy  of  the  Word.  A  chorus  of 
angelic  beings  witnesses  and  salutes  the  first  appear- 
ance of  the  newly  founded  world.  Where  wast  thou 
when  I  laid  the  foundations  of  the  earth  ?  Who  hath 
laid  the  measures  thereof,  or  Vv^ho  hath  stretched  the 
line  upon  it  ?  Who  laid  the  corner-stone  thereof,  when 
the  morning  stars  sang  together,  and  all  the  sons  of 
God  shouted  for  joy  V  (Job  xxxviii.  4 — 7).  It  is  pre- 
carious, of  course,  to  press  the  language  of  such  a 
poetical  apostrophe  for  purposes  of  doctrine ;  but  what 
we  learn  elsewhere  of  the  relation  of  angels  to  the 
world  makes  it  seem  natural  that  the  purely  spiritual 
creatures  should  be  the  first  to  come  into  being.  For 
they  are  not  the  outcome  of  the  different  parts  of 
the  universe  which  they  represent  and  influence — 
generated  by  the  growth  and  development  of  the 
things.  Rather,  we  may  consider  them  as  a  kind  of 
spiritual  substratum,  in  which  the  material  things  are 
planted.  They  form  a  preparatory  creation,  to  receive 
what  is  to  follow.  It  is,  perhaps,  for  this  reason  that, 
in  the  vision  of  Jacob,  and  our  Lord's  interpretation  of 
it,  the  angels  are  seen  ascending  first,  and  descending 
after :  their  natural  place  is  in  the  world  below  (S. 
John  i.  51). 

Our  knowledge  of  what  angels  are  must  necessarily 
be  very  limited.  Our  sole  authoritj^  regarding  them 
is  Holy  Scripture ;  and  in  endeavouring  to  group  to- 

G 


82         Relation  of  Angels  to  Nature. 


gether  some  of  the  notices  of  them  scattered  on  the 
face  of  the  Bible,  we  do  well  to  remember  that  much 
of  the  Bible  language  is  symbolical,  and  is  not  intended 
for  the  purpose  of  teaching  us  the  natural  history  of 
spiritual  beings,  any  more  than  of  earthly  ones. 

What  the  numbers  of  the  angels  may  be  we  can 
only  guess ;  but  there  seems  nothing  unreasonable  in 
the  suggestion  that  everything  has  its  spiritual 
counterpart,  so  to  speak,  and  that,  as  Origen  felt,  not 
a  plant  of  grass  or  a  fly  is  without  its  "  angel/'  We 
find  operations  of  nature  of  greater  and  of  less 
magnitude  spoken  of  as  committed  to  these  spiritual 
agents.  We  read  of  an  angel  "  that  hath  power  over 
fire  "  (Rev.  xiv.  18),  and  of  angels  holding  the  four 
winds  of  the  earth "  (Rev.  vii.  1).  The  figurative 
language  of  the  Apocalypse  reproduces  that  of  earlier 
books  of  the  Bible.  He  maketh  winds  His  angels,  a 
flash  of  fire  His  ministers  "  (Ps.  civ.  4).  "  He  rode 
upon  a  cherub,  and  did  fly  :  He  came  flying  upon  the 
wings  of  the  wind  "  (Ps.  xviii.  10).  It  is  but  a  gloss, 
but  we  may  believe  it  to  be  a  true  gloss,  when  the 
action  of  an  intermittent  and  healing  spring  is  attri- 
buted to  an  angel  (S.  John  v.  4).  An  angel's  descent 
caused  the  earthquake  on  the  morning  of  our  Lord's 
resurrection.  The  control  of  diseases,  especially  of  an 
epidemic  sort,  is  distinctly  assigned  to  angels.  An 
angel  smites  Herod  with  his  horrible  malady ;  angels 
annihilate  the  hosts  of  Sennacherib,  and  are  seen  with 
outstretched  hand  over  the  plague-threatened  city  of 
Jerusalem.  They  seem,  with  their  native  regularity, 
well  fitted  to  preside  over  the  undeviating  course  of 


Appointed  Guardians  to  Man.  83 


nature,  and  are  inseparably  linked  to  it.  Hence,  in 
the  mystic  throne  upon  which  the  Almighty  moves 
in  Ezekiel's  vision,  symbolical  of  the  universe,  the 
winged  living  creatures  are  vitally  connected  with  a 
complicated  set  o£  wheels,  themselves  full  of  eyes,  and 
penetrated  by  "the  spirit  of  the  living  creature" 
(Ezek.  i.  20).  Later  speculations  have  not  hesitated 
to  find  an  angel  of  the  sun,  and  angels  of  the  planets  ; 
nor  is  there  anything  improbable  in  the  thought  that 
such  living  agencies  regulate  the  movements  of  the 
heavenly  bodies,  and  that  they  may  even  have  taken 
an  active  part  in  developing  both  them  and  the  things 
of  earth  out  of  the  primordial  chaos. 

But  it  is  in  connexion  with  man  that  their  true 
significance  comes  out.  All  nature  exists  for  man ; 
and  the  spirits,  greater  and  less,  which  are  so  bound 
up  with  nature,  find  their  true  vocation  in  ministering 
to  man.  It  seems  probable  that  each  man  has  his 
special  attendant  spirit,  representing  him  before  God, 
and  in  some  ways  acting  on  his  behalf  among  men,  so 
that  it  is  difficult  sometimes  to  distinguish  between 
the  man's  own  self-conscious  "  spirit or  "  ghost,"  and 
his  "  angel."  "  Take  heed  that  ye  despise  not  one  of 
these  little  ones ;  for  I  tell  you  that  their  angels  in 
heaven  unceasingly  look  upon  the  face  of  My  Father 
which  is  in  heaven  "  (S.  Matt,  xviii.  10).  "  She  ran  in 
and  announced  that  Peter  stood  before  the  door  ;  .  . 
but  they  said.  It  is  his  angel "  (Acts  xii.  15).  How- 
ever this  may  be—whether  one  particular  guardian  is 
for  life  attached  to  every  man,  or  many  guardians  at 
once,  or  different  guardians  in  succession  and  in  bands. 


84  Their  Ministrations  to  Man. 


any  of  which  would  fit  the  language  o£  the  Bible — it 
is  indubitable  that  men  who  are  endeavouring  to  rise 
to  the  God-given  dignity  of  human  nature  are  special 
objects  of  the  uninterrupted  care  of  angels.  "  Are  they 
not  all  ministerial  spirits,  perpetually  sent  forth  on 
service  for  the  sake  of  those  who  are  to  inherit  salva- 
tion ? "  (Heb.  i.  14).  If  the  word  rendered  "  minis- 
teriaF'  Q^movfi^iKa)  makes  us  think  of  their  disciplined 
and  regular  movements,  as  of  some  great  temple-ritual 
in  which  they  bear  their  several  parts,  the  word  for 
"  service "  (elc  SiaKoviav)  brings  out  their  busy  and 
lowly  attendance  upon  the  needs  of  men.  They  supply, 
whether  unseen  or  on  occasion  seen,  their  bodily  wants. 
They  shield  them  from  accident  (Ps.  xci.  11, 12).  They 
protect  them  from  fire  and  from  Avild  beasts  (Dan.  iii. 
28  ;  vi.  22).  They  can  bring  them  food  (1  Kings  xix. 
6),  or  turn  the  darkness  into  light,  or  open  the  iron 
gates  of  a  prison  for  them  (Acts  xii.  7,  10).  By  what 
means  the  spiritual  can  work  such  eifects  upon  the 
material  we  cannot  tell,  not  even  knowing  by  what 
means  our  own  spirits  work  upon  our  fleshly  frames ; 
but  if  it  be  true,  as  already  suggested,  that  the 
ordinary  operations  of  nature  are  under  their  super- 
vision, we  need  not  be  astonished  at  these  special  acts 
of  power  over  physical  objects.  Still,  it  is,  perhaps, 
easier  to  understand  how  they  can  be  the  bearers  of 
spiritual  messages  from  God  to  men — of  promise  (Gen. 
xxii.  15;  S.  Luke  ii.  10),  of  rebuke  (Judg.  ii.  1),  of 
Avarning  (S.  Matt.  ii.  13),  of  enlightenment  (Dan.  viii. 
10),  of  comfort  (Dan.  x.  18) ;  and  how  they  can  join  iu 
our  pu])]ic  worsliip  witli  satisfaction  or  the  contrary 


Their  Spiritttal  Natttre,  85 


(1  Cor.  xi.  10),  and  can  carry  the  aspirations  and 
prayers  of  men  up  to  God  (Rev.  viii.  3). 

The  angels  are  pure  spirits,  without  form,  though 
various  symbolical  shapes  express  them  when  they  are 
manifested  to  the  senses :  they  appear  sometimes  as 
young  men ;  sometimes  as  horses  of  fire  and  chariots 
of  fire  (Zech.  i.  8 ;  2  Kings  vi.  17);  sometimes,  it 
may  be,  as  birds  (1  Kings  xvii.  6).  So  far  as  we  are 
aware,  they  have  no  manner  of  propagation.  For  this 
reason  it  is,  probably,  that  they  are  called  sons  of 
God,"  as  owing  their  existence  to  Him  alone,  without 
the  instrumentality  of  parentage  (S.  Luke  xx.  36). 
They  are  not  bound  together  by  a  unity  of  substance 
such  as  binds  together  men,  or  any  other  race  of 
animals,  but  stand  or  fall  purely  as  individuals. 
They  cannot,  strictly  speaking,  be  divided  into  species 
or  kinds.  Perhaps,  therefore,  no  distinction  other 
than  one  of  function  is  contained  in  the  names  of 
Cherubim  and  Seraphim — the  "  Forms,"  which  appear 
to  be  the  most  closely  allied  to  the  physical  creation 
— and  the  "Burning  ones,"  whose  life  appears  to 
be  entirely  occupied  with  adoring  contemplation, 
forming,  as  it  were,  a  body-guard  round  the  immediate 
Presence,  to  burn  up  any  evil  thing  which  might 
approach  (Isa.  vi.  2). 

The  pure  spirituality  of  the  angels,  by  virtue  of 
which  they  are  able  to  hear  and  contemplate  God, 
through  the  Eternal  Word,  immediately,  gives  them 
great  power  and  great  dignity  (Ps.  ciii.  20 ;  2  S.  Pet.  ii. 
11).  Their  terrible  and  imperious  strength  is  the  first 
thing  observable  in  their  apparitions.    The  prophet 


86 


Their  Power. 


by  the  river  Hidclekel  (Dan.  x.  8),  and  the  Roman 
soldiers  at  the  sepulchre  of  our  Lord,  alike  swooned 
at  the  sight  of  an  angel ;  S.  John,  in  the  Apocalypse, 
fell  worshipping  at  the  angel's  feet.  The  spiritual 
might  and  burning  indignation  in  the  face  of  S. 
Stephen  reminded  the  guilty  Sanhedrin  of  an  angelic 
vision.  Even  in  their  tenderest  ministrations,  their 
strength  comes  prominently  into  view.  Daniel  con- 
fesses that  the  angel's  touch  has  strengthened  him 
(Dan.  X.  19);  and  when  our  Blessed  Lord  was  seen 
to  "  reel  amid  that  solitary  fight "  in  the  garden,  the 
angel  which  appeared  to  Him  did  not  merely  soothe 
or  encourage  Him,  but — the  word  is  a  remarkable 
word  (fv(crxi5wv)— communicated  to  Him  some  inward 
supporting  force.  In  comparison  with  the  angels, 
man,  in  his  present  state,  seems  but  a  feeble  creature. 
He  is  subject  for  the  time  being  to  their  control,  and 
they  rule  over  him.  Even  the  Incarnate  Word  Him- 
self, during  His  earthly  sojourn,  was  "  made  lower 
a  short  space  than  the  angels"  (Heb.  ii.  7),  who 
governed,  in  some  sense,  while  they  waited  upon  Him, 
as  they  do  with  other  men.  In  all  their  communica- 
tions with  men  they  show  that  they  mean  to  be 
believed  and  obeyed.  ''I  am  Gabriel,  that  standeth 
by  in  the  presence  of  God  ;  .  .  .  and  lo,  thou  shalt  be 
mute,  and  not  able  to  speak,  until  the  day  that  these 
things  shall  come  to  pass,  because  thou  believest  not 
my  words"  (S.  Luke  i.  19,  20).  They  are  not  to  be 
trifled  with,  any  more  than  physical  nature  itself,  and 
cannot  leave  the  authoritative  station  in  which  the 
Eternal  Word  has  ranged  tliem. 


Their  Order. 


87 


The  angels  are  not  a  mere  multitude  of  isolated 
spirits.  They  are  camps,  hosts,  armies — Mahanaim, 
Sabaoth  (Gen.  xxxii.  2 ;  Ps.  xxiv.  10).  There  are 
Archangels  as  well  as  angels.  S.  Paul  and  S.  Peter 
half  adopt  a  still  larger  nomenclature  of  angelic  ranks, 
though  it  is  plain  that  they  only  borrow  the  nomen- 
clature from  teachers  whose  teaching  they  are  in  part 
combating.  Principalities  and  Authorities "  is  a 
frequent  phrase  with  them ;  and  at  other  times  S. 
Paul  adds  the  titles  of  Thrones  and  Dominions  and 
Powers  (Eph.  i.  21 ;  Col.  i.  16).  The  extent  of  their 
sway  it  is  impossible  to  guess ;  but  they  appear  in 
some  way  to  have  not  only  individual  persons,  but 
large  bodies  of  men  and  whole  nations,  subject  to 
them.  There  are  "  Princes  "  of  Persia  and  Grecia,  as 
well  as  of  the  Chosen  People  (Dan.  x.  20,  21) ;  and  in 
something  of  the  same  way,  it  may  be,  the  seven 
Churches  of  Asia  are  represented  as  under  the 
management  of  seven  "  angels,"  whose  character  is 
mysteriously  one  with  that  of  the  Churches  under 
them.  Their  power  over  men  is  not  such  as  to  destroy 
human  free  will  and  responsibility ;  yet  it  forms  one 
of  the  many  conditions  under  which  our  freedom  acts. 
Those  great  moulding  influences  of  which  we  speak 
under  such  terms  as  the  "  spirit  of  the  age "  or 
national  character  "  may  well  be  due  to  the  unseen 
"  Principalities    under  whom  we  live. 

Some  Christian  thinkers  go  so  far  as  actually  to 
identify  these  influences  with  the  angelic  agencies,  at 
the  cost,  as  it  would  seem,  of  the  personal  conscious- 
ness and  will  of  the  angels.    Our  acquaintance  with 


88  Their  Personality. 


the  nature  of  pure  spirits  is  so  slight  that  we  may 
hardly  deny  the  theory ;  but  the  personal  names  given 
to  some  of  the  blessed  angels  appear  to  teach  that 
some,  at  any  rate,  are  more  than  vague  and  semi- 
conscious influences.  Besides  the  apocryphal  Kaphael, 
who  guides  Tobias,  and  Uriel,  who  communes  with 
Esdras,  there  is  Gabriel,  who  visits  Daniel  and 
Zacharias,  and  heralds  the  Incarnation  to  the  blessed 
Virgin.  At  the  head  of  the  whole  spiritual  hierarchy 
stands  a  great  being  to  whom,  in  a  special  way,  the 
championship  of  the  Chosen  People  and  its  leaders 
was  committed.  His  name — Michael,  "Who  is  like 
God  ?  " — proclaims  the  unimaginable  distance  between 
the  mightiest  of  created  essences  and  the  Creator. 
Though  these  mighty  spirits  are  true  "  kings  (jSacrt- 
Xevovrcc)"  and  "lords  (fcupteuovrec)  "  (1  Tim.  vi.  15), 
yet  high  above  them  is  that  Firstborn  of  all  creation 
in  whom  they  were  created  (Col.  i.  16) — whom  S.  John 
saw  riding  forth  to  battle  with  His  name  on  thigh 
and  garment,  "  King  of  kings,  and  Lord  of  lords," 
while  a  higher  title  declares  Him  to  be  the  "  Word  of 
God,"  in  whom  is  made  the  complete  revelation  of 
God  to  His  creatures,  and  a  third  name,  still  more 
august,  is  there,  expressing,  not  His  office  or  His 
work,  but  His  true  personal  glory — "a  name  which 
no  man  knoweth,  but  He  Himself"  (Rev.  xix.  16, 
13,  12). 

§7. 

To  gain  a  knowledge  of  the  liistory  of  the  material 
"  lioavcns  and  earth/'  theology  must  sit  at  the  feet 


Dogma  and  Science. 


89 


of  science.  We  have  to  look  to  man's  investigation 
rather  than  to  God's  revelation.  Or  rather,  we  look 
for  God's  revelation  to  come  to  us  in  a  different  form. 
For  if  the  reasoning  faculty  in  man  is  (as  S.  Athanasius 
teaches)  "  a  kind  of  shadow  of  the  Divine  Word,"  and 
if  the  order  in  nature  is  also  due  to  the  immanent 
energy  of  the  Divine  Word,  then  whatever  human 
reason  truly  recognises  in  the  order  of  the  world 
about  us  is  a  true  revelation  from  God.  We  must 
not,  indeed,  too  severely  blame  the  timidity  of  those 
believers  who  resist  as  long  as  they  can  a  new  light  of 
science  because  it  seems  at  variance  with  revealed 
dogma.  It  is  not  only  natural,  but  right,  that  men 
should  refuse  to  accept  new  and  momentous  theories 
until  they  have  been  well  tested,  and  that  the  apparent 
sense  of  Scripture  should  not  be  discarded  as  if  it 
were  of  no  importance.  But  all  that  a  true  believer 
will  require  is  that  the  theories  of  science  should  be 
scientifically  made  good  ;  and  when  once  this  is  done, 
he  will  accept  them  with  gratitude.  He  knows  that 
Truth  cannot  be  divided  against  Itself,  that  is,  Christ 
against  Christ  (S.  John  xiv.  6).  The  new  light  may 
alter  his  interpretation  of  a  text  of  Scripture,  or  of 
a  book  of  it;  it  may  require  a  readjustment  of  his 
conception  of  Inspiration  as  a  whole ;  it  may  modify 
his  view  of  some  important  doctrine.  But  he  will  be 
certain  that  nothing  can  be  lost  by  progress  in  true 
knowledge,  and  that  the  view  so  modified  of  Christ, 
of  the  world,  of  the  Bible,  of  Providence,  of  man,  will 
result  in  a  richer  and  more  living  doctrine,  and  lead 
to  a  more  profound  adoration  of  a  God  whose  won- 


90 


The  Mosaic  Account  of  Creation 


drous  works  declare  His  Name  to  be  nearer  than  we 
thought. 

§  8. 

This  is  not  the  place  in  which  to  attempt  an  ex- 
haustive reconciliation  between  the  first  chapter  of 
Genesis  and  the  discoveries  of  modern  science.  The 
design  of  the  first  chapter  of  Genesis  (it  has  often 
been  pointed  out)  is  not  to  teach  us  scientific  facts, 
but  the  w^ay  in  which  scientific  facts  are  religiously  to 
be  regarded.  A  series  of  visions  passes  before  the 
recipient  of  the  revelation,  like  the  visions  of  Isaiah 
and  Ezekiel,  for  him  to  interpret  as  he  may.  Selected 
facts  in  the  history  of  nature  are  depicted  to  him,  so 
grouped  and  in  such  an  order  as  to  convey  to  a 
spiritual  intelligence  all  that  is  necessary  to  be  known 
of  the  history  of  the  relation  of  the  world  to  its 
Creator.  That  any  part  of  the  account  in  Genesis  is 
scientifically  inexact  does  not  appear  to  be  proven; 
but  even  if  it  were,  the  object  of  an  artist  is  not 
always  to  copy  line  for  line  what  he  sees  before  him. 
It  produces  the  required  effect  more  livingly,  nature  is 
more  truthfully  portrayed,  by  following  a  different 
method.  So  it  may  be  with  the  first  chapter  of 
Genesis.  The  main  thing  is  to  produce  a  true  effect 
by  bringing  out  certain  great  truths. 

It  is  there  seen,  in  the  first  instance,  that  matter 
is  not  eternal,  but  that  it  had  an  historical  beginning, 
and  that  the  sole  cause  of  its  beginning  was  the  will 
of  God.  Next,  we  are  made  to  observe  that  tilings 
were  not  in  the  beginning  such  as  we  see  them  now* 


Religions  rather  than  Scientific,  91 


They  have  only  attained  to  their  present  condition 
through  a  series  of  acts  of  Divine  power.  At  first 
t]iere  is  but  a  seething  chaos  of  forces  and  atoms, 
"  without  form  and  void."  This  chaos  comes  step 
by  step  to  be  an  organic  and  harmonious  world ;  but 
the  transformation  is  not  due  to  accidental  causes, 
nor  to  some  natural  property  inherent  in  the  material 
particles  themselves  apart  from  God.  It  is  traced  to 
the  action  o£  the  Creator  Spirit.  Even  if  we.  were 
to  translate,  And  a  wind  of  God," — instead  of  "  the 
Spirit  of  God/' — "was  hovering  upon  the  face  of 
the  waters,"  yet  that  phrase  would  not  be  explained 
by  saying  that  it  was  an  Orientalism  for  a  "  mighty 
wind."  It  would  testify  that  our  God  was  not  the 
God  of  the  Deist,  making  the  world  and  leaving 
it  to  itself ;  and  the  Christian  would  still  see,  under 
the  figurative  description  of  the  rushing  mighty  wind, 
the  action  of  the  Divine  Spirit  imparting  life  and 
order  and  beauty.  And  each  new  movement  of 
the  creation  upwards  to  a  more  perfect  system  and 
a  richer  differentiation  is  (in  the  same  way)  ascribed 
to  a  voice  of  God,  a  free  utterance  of  the  Divine 
Word.  The  days "  which  mark  the  stages  of 
development  are  probably  to  be  taken  in  their  literal 
sense,  not,  indeed,  as  indicating  the  length  of  time 
which  the  development  historically  took,  but  as  the 
symbolical  framing  of  the  successive  visions  to  the 
Seer's  eye.  Three  times  over,  and  only  three  times, 
a  truly  creative  act  is  discerned  ;  first,  in  the  pro- 
duction of  the  primeval  atoms  out  of  which  the  uni- 
verse is  constructed ;  second,  in  the  introduction  of 


92  Nature  ciclminates  in  Man. 


sentient  animal  life,  all  else,  apparently,  even  to  the 
growth  o£  organic  vegetable  life,  being  treated  as  only 
an  arrangement  of  what  already  exists ;  and  lastly, 
in  the  movement  by  which  man  is  created  in  the 
image  of  God  (Gen.  i.  1,  21,  27).  Thus,  while  Moses 
does  not  enter  upon  a  detailed  and  scientific  account, 
he  at  least  prepares  the  believer  to  hear  of  an  evolu- 
tion in  some  form ;  and  to  hear  that  that  evolution 
all  tends,  with  a  Divine  unity  of  purpose,  to  the 
genesis  of  man.  All  the  efforts  of  nature  are  bent 
upon  producing  a  man.  When  man  at  last  stands 
upon  the  earth,  the  natural  development  is  finished. 
Then  comes  the  "  seventh  day,"  expressive  of  rest  in 
an  accomplished  work,  ushering  in  a  new  and  higher 
kind  of  progress. 

§9. 

The  infinite  development  of  which  man  is  capable 
makes  him  the  lord  and  heir  of  all  things,  under  God. 
His  intelligence  enables  him  even  now  to  rule  himself, 
and  to  control  the  animal  and  the  material  world. 

The  earth  hath  God  given  to  the  children  of  men  " 
(Ps.  cxv.  16).  Man  is  to  subdue  it  (Gen.  i.  28) ;  and, 
sometimes  by  slow  steps  and  sometimes  (as  of  late 
years)  by  great  strides,  science  advances  towards  the 
fulfilment  of  the  task,  although  an  immensity  yet 
remains  to  be  fulfilled.  It  is  man's  kingdom,  to  be 
brought  under  a  reign  of  holy  law.  But  his  powers 
are  as  yet  only  in  their  nonage,  nor  can  he  yet  work 
the  wonders  upon  creation  which  he  is  destined  to 
work  when  tlie  great  regeneration  takes  place.  The 


His  destined  Superiority  to  Angels,  93 


very  angels  who  now  govern  the  universe  are  only 
temporary  regents  on  his  behalf  —  "  tutors  and 
stewards "  (Gal.  iv.  2), — to  apply  to  them  what  S. 
Paul  himself  applies  somewhat  differently  —  under 
whom  he  and  his  possessions  are,  by  the  Father's 
will,  until  the  appointed  day.  They  have  not  man's 
interminable  spring  of  progress  in  themselves;  and 
therefore,  mighty  as  they  are,  it  is  not  to  them  that 
God  has  "  subjected  the  world  to  come,"  but  to  that 
being  whom,  even  now  in  his  weakness,  God  deigns 
to  visit  so  graciously  and  so  richly  (Heb.  ii.  5,  6).  To 
the  great  Head  of  humanity  all  principalities  and 
powers  are  already  subject,  and  hereafter  they  will  be 
so  to  all  the  true  members.  We  shall  judge  angels 
(1  Cor.  vi.  2,  8),  as  well  as  the  world,  not  in  the  sense 
of  acquitting  or  condemning  merely,  but  in  the  lai'ger 
sense  of  governing  and  presiding  over  them. 


Chapter  IV. 


0im  an&  j^t^  dFalK 

Man,  the  created  Image  of  God — His  Body  a7id  its  earthly  Origin — His 
Spirit — His  Soul— Liability  to  Teinptatio7i — The  Knoivledge  oj 
Good  and  Evil — The  Devil,  and  the  Fall  of  Man — Unity  of  the 
Hitman  Race — Tradticianism  and  Creatianisjn — Hereditary  Sin — 
Enslaveme7it  of  the  Will — Mankind  still  capable  of  Restoration, 

§1. 

Looking  upon  man  as  we  now  see  him,  we  are  con- 
scious of  looking  upon  a  wreck,  but  a  wreck  which 
still  retains  enough  of  the  original  constitution  to 
enable  us  to  conjecture  what  he  is  intended  for.  Man 
is  intended  to  be,  in  the  world,  what  the  Eternal  Son 
is  above  the  world.  He  is  the  created  image  of  God, 
as  the  Word  is  the  uncreated.  Other  creatures  reflect 
fragments  of  the  mind  of  God,  but  in  man  God  is 
reflected  whole.  A  rock,  a  tree,  an  animal,  have  no 
meaning  by  themselves;  they  only  gain  a  meaning 
through  their  connexion  with  other  things,  and 
especially  with  man.  But  man,  though  essentially 
bound  up  with  the  world,  has  a  meaning  by  himself. 
He  is  a  complete  world  in  himself.  Wc  cannot  say 
what  special  faculties  or  special  grouping  of  faculties 
in  man  constitutes  the  image  of  God  in  him ;  for  man, 


Mosaic  Accotmt  of  his  Origin,  95 


with  all  his  complexity,  is  a  single  and  undivided 
whole.  There  is  something  in  him  corresponding 
to  everything  that  is  in  God.  The  uncreated  Image 
of  God  contains  explicitly,  in  one  comprehensive  con- 
sciousness, every  motion  of  the  Divine  life;  the 
created  image  contains  the  same  implicitly,  in  a  con- 
sciousness destined  to  expand  for  ever,  drawing  for 
ever  nearer  to  the  Divine  fulness,  while  for  ever 
finding  an  unexhausted  ocean  beyond  him  (Eph.  iii. 
19,  residing  7rXi?pw0)?rf). 

§2. 

Man  is  at  once  a  summing  up  of  that  which  was 
before  him,  and  a  point  of  new  departure.  The  say- 
ing, "  Let  Us  make  man  in  Our  image "  (Gen.  i.  26), 
is  in  no  way  opposed  to  the  modern  theory  of  our 
development  (so  far  as  the  animal  nature  is  concerned) 
out  of  lower  forms  of  life.  Indeed,  it  would  be  per- 
fectly grammatical  to  translate,  Let  Us  make  man 
into  Our  image  " — at  once  suggesting  that  a  higher 
potency  was  conferred  on  an  already  existing  thing. 
This,  however,  is  unnecessary.  Man  became  man, 
whatever  he  may  have  been  before,  by  being  made 
in  the  image  of  God.  That  gift  constituted  his 
humanity.  Out  of  what  material  he  was  thus  made 
is  not  mentioned  in  the  verse  which  we  have  quoted. 
In  another  verse,  which  by  some  is  supposed  to  con- 
tain a  different  tradition,  and  has  hastily  been  judged 
incompatible  with  the  first,  we  read,  "  The  Lord  God 
formed  man,  of  the  dust  of  the  ground,  and  breathed 
into  his  nostrils  the  breath  of  life "  (Gen.  ii.  7). 


g6       Mans  Body  formed  of  the  Dust. 


Without  disloyalty  to  these  words,  we  may,  in  the 
light  o£  modern  discoveries,  believe  that  the  dust  was 
already  animated  dust  before  the  breathing  spoken  of, 
and  ages  may  have  elapsed  between  the  "  forming 
and  the  "  breathing/'  For  the  object  of  the  sacred 
writer  is  to  teach  the  lowly  origin  of  man's  physical 
constitution — that  on  one  side  he  is  composed  of 
mere  material  particles,  "  of  the  earth,  earthy ; " 
and  this  is  equally  shown,  whether  we  believe  the 
first  man's  body  to  have  been  fresh  formed  out  of  its 
chemical  elements,  or  produced  out  of  earlier  living 
organisms.  But  we  may  see  a  special  fitness  in  the 
latter  thought  if  man  is  indeed  to  be  the  meeting- 
point  of  heaven  and  earth.  Each  human  being  now, 
they  tell  us,  in  the  rudimentary  stages  of  his  growth, 
passes  through  phases  similar  to  those  of  the  lower 
animals.  In  a  sense,  each  of  us  gathers  up  and  re- 
capitulates in  his  own  body  the  forms  of  life  below 
him.  And  that  which  thus  takes  place  in  the  speci- 
men may  well  be  true  of  the  genus.  We  welcome  the 
continuity  of  physical  life  which  binds  us  to  all  that 
went  before  us  and  to  all  that  on  earth  surrounds  us. 
The  body  which  is  the  result  of  that  long  evolution  is 
one  of  which  we  have  no  need  to  be  ashamed.  It  is 
itself  a  noble  thing.  It  is  not  yet  all  that  it  will  be, 
but  even  now  it  has  something  of  the  glory  of  the 
Image  of  God,  being  the  true  expression  in  flesh  of 
that  which  man  at  present  really  is. 


The  human  Spirit, 


97 


§  3. 

Upon  the  bodily  side  man  stands  among  the 
animals  as  the  noblest  o£  them ;  but  he  has  another 
side  by  which  he  holds  communion  with  God  and 
invisible  things.  He  has  a  spirit  as  well  as  a  body — a 
spirit  not  like  that  "  spirit  of  the  beast  which  goeth 
downward  to  the  earth,"  having  but  an  attraction  to 
the  things  of  sense,  and  that  an  unreflecting  attrac- 
tion ;  "  the  spirit  of  the  sons  of  man is  one  which 
is  ascending"  (Eccles.  iii.  21).  The  spirit  is  in  us 
the  element  of  self -consciousness  and  freedom.  By  it 
we  see  our  true  relation  to  the  things  of  sense,  and  are 
able  to  claim  affinities  above  them.  It  is  a  gift  from 
God  (Eccles.  xii.  7),  and  unless  it  be  unfairly  tampered 
with,  it  must  by  its  very  constitution  "  ascend,"  and 
aspire  after  God  and  what  is  Godlike.  In  it  is  the 
seat  of  the  higher,  the  only  true,  free,  will,  as  opposed 
to  the  random  animal  impulses  of  the  flesh.  There 
lies  the  power  of  conscience,  by  which  we  are  able  to 
judge  our  own  actions,  comparing  them  with  what  we 
see  to  be  the  right  standard,  and  condemning  our- 
selves when  we  have  allowed  the  true  will  to  be 
mastered  by  the  inferior  appetite.  Such  a  spirit  is 
not  and  cannot  be  (so  far  as  we  can  understand)  a 
product  of  natural  evolution,  but  comes  direct  from 
the  hand  of  God. 

§4. 

Man  is  thus  a  dual  being,  living  at  once  in  two 
worlds,  not  two  separate  lives,  but  one  life  in  the  two. 

H 


98         Difference  of  Soitl  and  Spii^it. 


The  spirit  lives  in  the  body,  and  acts  through  it 
and  makes  it  its  vehicle.    The  meeting-point  o£  spirit 
and  body  appears  to  lie  in  the  souL     "The  Lord 
God  formed  man  out  o£  the  dust  of  the  ground'' — 
there  is  his  body — and  breathed  into  his  nostrils  the 
breath  of  life  " — there  is  his  spirit — ''and  man  became 
a  living  soul/'     Particular  expressions  like  ''living 
soul "  and  "  breath  of  life  "  might  be  used  of  other 
beings  than  man;  bvit  the  unique  act  of  the  Divine 
inbreathing  gives  in  this  instance  a  different  value  to 
the  words.     The  same  tripartite  division  of  man's 
being  is  distinctly  brought  out  by  S.  Paul.    "  May  the 
very  God  of  peace  sanctify  you  entire,  and  may  your 
spirit  and  soul  and  body  be  preserved  unimpaired 
unblameably,   in  the  coming  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ"  (1  Thess.  v.  23).    Once  more,  the  difference 
between  soul  and  spirit  is  sharply  marked  in  the 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews.    "  The  word  of  God  is  alive 
and  energetic,  piercing  even  to  the  dividing  of  soul 
and   spirit,  of  joints  and  marrow "  (Heb.  iv.  12). 
And  a  whole  array  of  thoughts  gather  about  the 
adjectives  derived  from  the  two  words  respectively. 
"  Spiritual "  things  (Trvevjuarffca),  stand  in  the  sharpest 
contrast  with  "  soul "  things  (^v\iKa),  which  latter  are 
represented  in  our  versions  by  the  word  "  natural " 
(1  Cor.  ii.  14;  xv.  44),  and  even  ''sensuar'  (S.  James 
iii.  15;  S.  Jude  19),  while  the  margin  of  the  Revised 
Version  suggests  the  ambiguous  rendering  ^'  animal." 
Holy  Scripture,  therefore,  although  frequently  lusing 
the  word  "  soul "  in  a  popular  sense,  eitlier  for  tho 
wliolc  iirmatei'ial  part  of  man,  or  for  the  man  himself 


Saving  and  Losing  of  the  SotiL  99 


in  the  fulness  of  his  individuality,  seems,  when  it  speaks 
with  psychological  precision,  to  join  the  soul  more 
closely  with  the  body  than  with  the  spirit.  Though 
capable  of  exaltation,  the  soul  more  naturally  gravitates 
downwards.  In  this  animal,  or  sensual,  or  natural, 
region  lies  the  great  struggle  of  life.  The  soul  is  torn 
by  the  conflict  between  flesh  and  spirit.  Math  both 
of  which  it  is  so  vitally  one.  It  is  their  debateable 
ground,  and  the  winning  of  it  is  the  winning  of  the 
man  himself.  His  very  life  is  at  stake.  The  one 
great  business  is  the  acquisition  of  the  soul (Heb.  x. 
39).  The  "loss  of  the  soul"  (S.  Mark  viii.  36)  is  the 
irreparable  loss.  That  loss  is  (so  far  as  this  life  is 
concerned)  consistent  with  very  great  and  valuable 
acquisitions.  The  man  may  not  merely  have  enjoyed 
sensual  pleasures,  and  the  possession  of  wealth  and 
influence  and  power,  but  he  may  have  attained  to 
great  intellectual  culture,  a  high  degree  of  learning 
and  scientific  knowledge  and  artistic  skill.  Yet  these 
things  belong,  after  all,  to  the  lower  faculties — the 
faculties  of  the  "  natural,"  or  sensual,"  or  "  animal," 
man ;  and  unless  they  have  been  put  at  the  disposal 
of  the  spiritual  faculties,  to  be  brought  to  the  service 
of  God,  the  soul  is  lost. 

§  5- 

It  is  this  duality  which  lays  man  open  to  tempta- 
tion. Though  the  Creator,  looking  down  upon  His 
newly  formed  image  in  Eden,  pronounces  him — or 
rather,  the  world  and  man  in  it — ''very  good,"  the 
goodness  was  not  a  final  and  completed  goodness. 


lOO        Mans  Original  Righteousness 


The  original  righteousness  "  in  which  we  were  made 
was  the  goodness  o£  a  perfectly  fair  and  noble  begin- 
ning. It  was  the  goodness  of  holy  infancy  as  com- 
pared with  that  of  the  fully  developed  saint.  It 
consisted  in  a  perfectly  well-ordered  constitution, 
which  only  needed  to  be  normally  exercised  that  it 
might  reach  a  true  moral  as  well  as  natural  perfec- 
tion. But  in  order  that  the  promise  of  that  first  fair 
start  might  be  realised,  it  was  necessary,  so  far  as  we 
can  see,  that  it  should  be  brought  to  the  test.  Good 
dispositions  do  not  ripen  into  virtues  except  by  seeing 
and  rejecting  their  opposites.  Though  made  "in  the 
image  of  God,"  it  is  significantly  said  that  man  was 
made  ''after  His  likeness.''  He  was  not  as  yet 
actually  like  in  character  to  God,  but  had  the  power 
and  tendency  to  rise  into  that  likeness  and  to  make 
it  voluntarily  his  own  by  the  proper  and  harmonious 
use  of  his  varied  faculties.  Man  had  himself  to 
train ;  and  he  had,  besides,  a  duty  towards  the  world, 
over  which  he  was  to  rule,  as  God's  representative. 
To  rule  over  the  world  in  any  full  sense,  he  needed  a 
sympathetic  appreciation  of  all  that  it  contained; 
and  to  have  a  sympathetic  appreciation  of  all  that 
the  world  contained  at  once  involved  a  possible 
seduction.  One  of  the  great  paradoxes  of  life  is  this 
— that  the  true  value  of  the  fiesh  and  fleshly  things 
is  only  known  to  those  who,  by  cultivation  of  their 
spiritual  n-ature,  are  able  to  maintain  their  indepen- 
dence of  the  flesh  and  their  attitude  of  sovereignty 
towards  it ;  while,  on  the  other  hand,  that  is  no  true 
spiritual   sovereignty  or  independence  which  looks 


to  be  made  his  own  by  Temptation.  loi 


upon  the  flesh  and  fleshly  thmgs  with  indifference,  or 
with  abhorrence,  or  with  contempt,  or  with  dread. 

If,  therefore,  man  was  to  bear  the  character  for 
which  he  was  destined,  and  if  he  was  to  perform  the 
office  for  which  he  was.  placed  in  the  world,  he  could 
not  but  be  tempted  to  fling  himself  with  too  much 
ardour  into  the  good  things  of  the  realm  that  was  put 
under  him,  and  to  make  it  his  own  instead  of  making 
it  God's.  But  the  very  attempt  to  make  it  his  own, 
irrespective  of  God,  tears  it  away  from  himself  and 
God  alike.  The  true  link  between  God  and  the  world 
is  severed,  and,  instead  of  "  subduing the  world,  man 
is  himself  "  subdued by  it.  No  longer  standing 
above  it,  in  the  stability  of  the  "free  spirit,"  he 
becomes  engrossed  in  it,  a  mere  part  of  it,  without 
true  freedom  of  will,  which  can  only  be  obtained  from 
communion  with  God.  By  selfish  grasping  at  the 
mastery  of  things,  he  makes  himself  the  sport  of  his 
surroundings ;  and  these  surroundings  have  them- 
selves become  disordered  by  man's  desertion  of  his 
post,  and  tend  to  become  more  and  more  disordered, 
and  to  exhibit  an  ever-sharper  antagonism  towards 
the  Creator's  will.  Man  himself  falls  into  bondage, 
and  "  the  creature  itself  also,"  according  to  S.  Paul, 
though  "not  willingly,"  shares  his  bondage,  and 
groans  for  deliverance  through  and  with  him  (Rom. 
viii.  19,  foil). 

§6. 

The  whole  account  of  the  Fall  of  man,  in  Genesis, 
is  full  of  difficulties.    It  contains,  doubtless,  a  record 


102    The  Knowledge  of  Good  and  Evil. 


of  true  historic  facts,  though  the  facts  are  presented 
to  us  under  an  allegorical  shape.  Under  any  other 
shape  we  could  not  have  received  or  understood  them. 

Our  first  parents,  in  a  state  of  innocence,  are  set 
before  us  as  dwelling  in  a  "  Garden  of  Delight," 
having  all  that  was  necessary  for  their  happy  develop- 
ment. Two  mystic  Trees  stand  in  the  garden,  of 
which  the  first,  the  Tree  of  Life,  no  doubt  represents 
the  life  of  union  with  God.  Of  this  they  were  per- 
mitted to  eat,  as  of  the  other  trees  of  the  garden. 
The  second,  the  Tree  of  Knowledge  of  Good  and  Evil, 
was  submitted  to  their  contemplation,  and  the  Creator 
Himself  forces  their  attention  to  it,  in  the  form  of  a 
commandment  not  to  eat  of  it,  combined  with  a  warn- 
ing of  the  consequences  of  so  doing.  By  this  tree, 
and  the  prohibition  attached  to  it,  we  are  to  under- 
stand that  God  wished  man  to  know  evil  indeed,  but  to 
know  it  as  He  Himself  knows  it — as  a  thing  possible^ 
but  hateful.  The  thought  of  evil  must,  it  is  admitted^ 
eternally  be  present  to  the  mind  of  God,  but  present 
as  the  contrary  of  all  that  God  is  or  can  be ;  and  if 
man  was  to  ri$e  into  the  likeness  of  his  Creator,  he 
too  must  know  evil,  but  as  a  thing  external  to  himself 
and  for  ever  to  be  detested.  To  eat  of  that  Tree  of 
Knowledge  of  Good  and  Evil — that  is,  probably,  of 
tlie  difference  between  good  and  evil,  or,  possibly, 
of  the  mixture  of  evil  with  good — is  to  become 
acquainted  with  the  difference,  not  by  contemplation, 
Imt  Ijy  experience,  to  know  what  evil  is  hy  choosing 
to  do,  and  suffer,  and  be,  evil. 

It  may  at  first  surprise  us  that  the  fatal  tree  did 


Form  asstinied  by  Htiinati  Temptation.  103 


not  appear  outwardly  repulsive,  and  thereby  of  itself 
guard  man  against  a  fall  But  such  a  thought  ignores 
the  very  nature  of  temptation.  Temptation  does  not 
and  cannot  come  to  man  in  a  bare  notional  form. 
Evil,  as  evil,  can  grdn  no  access  to  him  unless  it  be 
after  a  long  course  of  desperate  wickedness.  It  is 
only  as  the  abuse  of  that  which  is  jDOsitively  good 
and  desirable  that  it  possesses  any  attractions  for 
him;  and  so  long  as  man  is  conscious  of  having  a 
personality  of  his  own,  and  of  being  surrounded  by 
a  world  of  good  things,  so  long  the  Tree  of  Knowledge 
of  Good  and  Evil  cannot  help  looking  to  him  "  good 
for  food,  and  pleasant  to  the  eyes,  and  a  tree  to  be 
desired  to  make  one  wise.'' 

§7. 

But  although  man,  from  his  constitution,  could 
not  have  failed  to  feel  the  temptation — and  indeed  his 
rise  and  progress  without  it  cannot  be  imagined — ^yet 
we  are  allowed  to  understand  that  the  enticements  of 
the  world  were  not  sufficient  by  themselves  to  with- 
draw him  from  his  allegiance  to  the  Creator,  without 
the  interposition  of  a  ''seducing  spirit,''  which  made 
use  of  those  enticements.  The  account  of  the  Fall  in 
Genesis  sets  before  us  another  symbolic  figure  in  the 
scene,  namely,  the  Serpent.  Much  speculation  has 
gathered  round  this  figure,  and  various  explanations 
of  it  have  been  proposed.  But  the  common  solution 
seems  to  be  the  simplest.  Whatever  we  are  to  under- 
stand by  the  Devil,  the  same  we  may  understand  of 
this  cunning  and  insinuating  figure,  which,  perhaps 


I04  The  Genesis  of  Evil. 


itself  in  the  allegoric  picture  feeding  on  the  forbidden 
fruit,  suggests  the  doubt  of  God's  motive  in  forbidding 
it.  Certainly  the  Apocalypse  appears  to  identify  the 
two  :  "  The  great  dragon  was  cast  out,  the  ancient 
serpent,  he  that  is  called  the  Devil,  and  Satan,  he 
that  leadeth  astray  the  entire  inhabited  earth  "  (Rev. 
xii.  9).  It  will  be  necessary,  before  proceeding,  to 
dwell  for  a  while  upon  this  unhappy  being  and  his 
history.  In  so  doing  we  are  brought  face  to  face 
with  the  problem  of  the  origin  of  evil.  It  is  simple 
enough  to  narrate,  so  to  speak,  the  story  of  its  begin- 
ning ;  but  it  is  more  difficult — perhaps  impossible  at 
present — fully  to  explain  how,  in  the  eternal  nature 
of  things,  circumstances  could  arise  which  admit  of 
such  a  beginning  of  moral  evil. 

That  evil,  as  the  opposite  of  good,  must  always 
have  occupied  a  place  in  the  thoughts  of  God,  we 
have  already  seen.  But  God  can  neither  think,  nor 
do,  nor  create,  nor  be  in  any  way  drawn  towards 
evil,  so  as  to  call  it  into  any  positive  existence,  or 
give  it  any  historical  development.  It  remains  for 
Him  always  a  hateful  conception,  but  nothing  more. 
Although  the  utmost  excesses  of  what  might  be  done 
in  the  way  of  evil  lie  bare  to  His  consciousness,  God 
does  not  dwell  upon  it,  for  He  is  of  purer  eyes  than 
to  behold  evil,  and  cannot  look  on  iniquity (Hab.  i. 
13).  The  very  idea  of  it  is  revolting  to  Him.  All 
His  works,  as  He  first  made  them,  were  free  from  the 
lea»st  admixture  of  it,  and  from  tlic  least  tendency 
towards  it.  It  is  not  (as  the  ManicluT-ans  taught) 
inherent  in  matter.    It  is  not  involved  in  tlie  creation 


Fall  of  Satan, 


of  limited  wills.  Its  existence,  as  an  actual  fact,  is 
not  necessary  to  the  development  of  human  or  angelic 
excellence.  It  never  ought  to  have  been,  and  God 
never  designed  that  it  should  be.  And,  in  a  certain 
sense,  moral  evil  does  not  exist  now.  It  is  not  a  thing. 
It  only  exists  so  far  as  it  is  adopted  and  embodied  in 
evil  wills  ;  and  if  those  evil  wills  were  all  purged  of  it, 
evil  would  again  have  no  existence.  But  in  order  that 
wills  may  be  truly  good  and  not  evil,  they  must  have 
seen  evil,  and  seen  it  without  sympathy,  with  no 
desire  to  know  it  by  experience,  and  must  have  freely 
chosen  to  know  only  God.  We  can  form  no  idea  of  a 
holy  will,  without  evil  being  presented  to  it  as  a 
possible  alternative.  Therefore  the  very  creation  of 
beings  intended  to  be  holy  appears  to  involve  the  risk 
of  their  choosinsf  wronof. 

It  would  seem  that  this  necessary  test  had  been 
applied  to  older  spirits  than  man's.  Amongst  those 
angelic  beings  Avhom  God  appointed  to  be  His 
mediators  and  agents  with  the  lower  creation,  some 
made  the  right  choice,  and  some  the  wrong.  It  would 
be  rash  and  vain  to  profess  to  understand  in  what 
form  the  temptation  could  present  itself  to  pure  im- 
material spirits  ;  but  some  light  is,  perhaps,  thrown 
upon  the  question  by  S.  Paul's  warning  to  S.  Timothy 
not  to  appoint  a  new  convert  to  high  spiritual  office, 
"lest,  being  puffed  up  with  pride,  he  fall  into  the 
condemnation  of  the  Devil "  (1  Tim.  iii.  6).  Though 
the  meanixig  of  these  la^  words  is  doubtful,  it  has 
reasonably  been  supposed,  from  S.  Pauls  language, 
that  the  being  whom  we  now  know  as  the  Devil  fell 


io6  All  Sin  traced  to  Satan, 


in  some  way  through  pride — an  undue  elation  at  the 
position  he  occupied,  and  at  the  wealth  of  powers 
which  he  found  within  himself.  Our  Lord's  more 
general,  yet  more  explicit,  statement  is  that  "  he  stood 
not  firm  in  the  truth (S.  John  viii.  44,  qvk  eGTrjKev). 
All  forms  of  sin,  according  to  the  teaching  of  S.  John, 
are  departures  from  "  the  truth ; and  it  is  clear,  from 
our  Lords  words,  that  the  Evil  One  was  once  "in 
the  truth,"  but  did  not  maintain  his  position.  The 
same  is  taught  concerning  other  condemned  spirits : — 
"  Angels  which  kept  not  their  own  beginning  " — or,  as 
some  would  translate,  "  their  own  principality  " — "  but 
deserted  the  dwelling-place  vrhich  belonged  to  them'* 
(S.  Jude  6). 

At  what  point  of  time  this  fall  of  angels  took  place, 
or  whether  all  fallen  angels  fell  together,  is  uncertain. 
There  is  much  ground  for  thinking  that  S.  Jude 
identified  the  fall  of  the  angels,  of  which  he  speaks, 
with  the  fall  of  the  ''sons  of  God''  which  preceded 
the  Flood  (Gen.  vi.  2,  4).  Not  being  linked  together 
by  that  solidarity  of  species  which  unites  mankind, 
the  fall  of  one  did  not  necessarily  involve  the  fall  of 
others,  and  each  fell  for  himself  alone.  But  the  first, 
as  well  as  the  greatest,  to  fall  was  Satan,  if  we  rightly 
understand  our  Lord  to  say  that  Satan  is  not  only 
himself  a  liar,  but  "the  father  of  if  (S.  John  viii. 
44).  That  is  to  say,  all  evil,  as  an  active  and  existing 
fact,  is  to  be  traced  to  him.  It  was  he  who  first  gave 
historical  Ijirth  to  evil,  by  himself  choosing  to  try  it. 
When  and  liow  this  was,  we  are  not  told ;  we  only 
know  that  "  from  the  beginning  he  was  a  murderer," 


Uniqueness  of  his  Case. 


107 


— not,  that  is,  from  the  outset  of  his  own  existence,  but 
from  the  beginning  of  history  as  known  to  us,  from 
our  first  experience  of  his  dealings  with  us,  from  the 
day  when  he  induced  man  to  revolt  from  God,  and  so 
murdered  "  him. 
It  is  quite  possible  to  think  that  Satan  did  not 
attain  his  utmost  depth  of  wickedness  at  the  first 
bound.  The  ancient  theologians  are  agreed  that  he 
is  without  foreknowledge,  although  his  vast  experience 
has  doubtless  given  him  extraordinary  power  of  fore- 
casting. If  he  had  known,  or  believed — as  he  might 
have  known,  and  ought  to  have  believed — what  it 
would  come  to,  he  would  never  have  taken  the  first 
step  in  his  mad  and  wicked  adventure.  Having  once 
invented  evil  as  an  active  principle,  and  gaining 
perpetually  wider  knowledge  of  its  power,  he  was 
determined  to  play  it  out  to  the  end,  and  relied  upon 
its  force  to  rival  goodness  and  love.  "  Lo,  this  is  he 
that  took  not  God  for  his  strength,  but  trusted  in  the 
abundance  of  his  own  resources,  and  strengthened 
himself  upon  his  wickedness (Ps.  lii.  7).  This  it  is 
which  makes  the  case  of  Satan  a  case  of  unique  hope- 
lessness. Had  his  attempt  been  purely  a  speculative 
one,  or  had  it  been  a  mere  prank  like  that  of  a 
mischievous  child,  had  he  taken  care  to  try  the  power 
of  evil  upon  himself  alone,  had  he  been  frightened 
when  he  saw  how  fearful  a  force  he  had  set  at  work, 
or  believed  the  proofs  which  were  given  him  that 
love  and  goodness  were  still  more  powerful,  and  ac- 
knowledged, and  desisted,  then  we  can  imagine  that 
his  punishment  might  have  been  lessened  or  re- 


To8  The  Sedtiction  of  Man. 


mitted.  But,  knowing  the  evil  of  evil,  he  chose  it 
just  because  it  was  evil,  and  espoused  its  cause,  and 
explored  it  to  its  depths,  and  drcAv  it  all  into  his  life, 
until  evil  as  a  whole  became  as  entirely  identified  with 
Satan,  as  good  is  with  God.    He  is    the  Evil  One." 

The  seduction  of  man  was  one  stage  in  his  down- 
ward career.  Himself  having  tasted  evil,  he  per- 
suaded mankind  to  do  the  same,  not  in  the  open  and 
direct  manner  in  which  himself  had  done  so,  but 
craftily  and  subtilly,  as  the  serpent-form  expresses. 
He  displays  and  calls  attention  to  the  charms  of  the 
lower  world,  as  they  appeal  to  the  senses,  the  imagi- 
nation, and  the  intellect.  What  would  have  tempted 
silently  and  almost  unheeded  without  him,  becomes 
through  him  articulate,  a^ggressive,  insistent.  The 
special  point  of  assault  is  as  craftily  selected  as  the 
special  engine.  It  is  not  the  man  himself  who  is 
first  assailed — the  authoritative  rational  head;  but 
the  woman,  representing  the  more  impulsive  and 
passive  element  in  our  nature.  Not  seeing,  though 
she  ought  to  have  seen,  what  she  was  about,  she 
yielded  to  the  desire  which  ought  to  have  been  felt 
and  checked;  and  then,  in  her  turn,  became  temp- 
tress. The  man,  who  would  have  resisted  the  attrac- 
tions of  sense,  and  detected  the  falsehood  of  the 
spiritual  whisper,  was  unwilHng  to  withstand  the 
temptation  when  he  had  to  choose  which  he  would 
part  company  with,  his  God  or  his  fallen  wife,  and 
went  open-eyed  into  the  snare.  "Adam  was  not 
'  beguiled,  but  the  woman  being  beguiled  hath  fallen 
into  transgression  "  (1  Tim.  ii.  14). 


Punishment  of  the  Fallen,  109 

The  words,  "Because  thou  hast  done  this  thing," 
in  the  sentence  on  the  serpent,  show  that  Satan's  last 
day  o£  grace  w^as  thus  ended.  Each  actor  in  the 
scene  receives  the  natural  and  condign  reward  o£  his 
action.  Each  must  accept  the  situation  in  which  he 
has  placed  himself.  The  man  is  to  continue  his  task 
of  subduing  the  earth,  under  the  new  difficulties  with 
which  he  has  surrounded  himself;  the  woman  still 
to  crave,  and  to  suffer  through  her  craving ;  the  evil 
spirit  to  remain  what  for  the  nonce  he  had  chosen  to 
be — expressed  by  the  serpent-figure,  with  no  power  to 
erect  himself  any  more,  unable  to  rise  even  into  such 
freedom  and  happiness  as  are  enjoyed  by  the  brute 
creation,  to  find  no  support  for  his  existence  except  in 
dust."  And  so  to  this  day  it  is  with  the  Evil  One, 
and  will  be  so  long  as  he  continues  to  exist.  Unable 
any  longer  to  receive  the  ''food  of  angels,"  and 
having  no  more  power  of  self-sustenance  than  any 
other  creature,  he  is  driven,  with  all  the  other  spirits 
which  have  taken  his  side,  to  find  a  life  for  himself  in 
picking  up  what  he  can  in  the  world  of  living  beings 
— in  that  lower  element  out  of  which  man  is  made — 
by  actual  possessions  of  man  or  beast  when  circum- 
stances allow  of  it;  or  by  triumphs  of  sin,  petty  as 
well  as  great;  or  at  least  by  making  himself  felt 
through  cruel  and  harassing  temptations.  These  are 
his  only  outlet  into  real  existence. 

§8- 

The  position  which  Adam  occupies  with  regard 
to  the  human  race  makes  his  fall  a  matter  of  moii> 


no         Unity  of  the  Human  Race. 


than  personal  consequence  to  himself.  Mankind  is 
so  bound  up  together  that,  even  now,  what  befalls 
any  member  of  the  species  affects  the  fortunes  of  the 
whole.  "No  one  of  us  liveth  unto  himself,  and  no 
one  dieth  unto  himself"  (Rom.  xiv.  27).  But  Adam 
was  not  a  mere  individual  member  of  the  species, 
like  one  of  ourselves.  He  was  the  whole  of  young 
humanity.    It  was  all  gathered  in  his  one  person. 

It  is  not  needful  here  to  go  into  the  inquiry 
whether,  as  a  matter  of  history,  the  human  race 
emanated  from  a  single  pair  of  progenitors  or  not. 
It  may  suffice  to  say  that,  although  the  fact  has  been 
discussed  with  freedom,  no  scientific  proof  has  been 
given  to  the  contrary.  The  unity  of  the  race  would 
not,  indeed,  be  overthrown  by  the  discovery  that 
several  strands  of  diverse  origin  had  been  blent  to- 
gether. If  ever  such  proof  is  forthcoming,  the  Church 
will  be  guided  by  the  Holy  Spirit  to  see  the  true 
bearings  of  the  newly  acquired  fact.  Mankind  would 
still  have  many  points  of  union.  But  till  then  we 
may,  with  equal  fidelity  to  science  and  to  Scripture, 
believe  that  the  acknowledged  unity  now  existing  is 
based  upon  a  unity  of  origination.  Logically,  it 
seems  easier  to  account  for  the  divergence  of  what 
was  at  first  one,  than  for  the  union  of  what  was  at 
first  heterogeneous.  And  the  New  Testament,  as  well 
as  the  Old,  seems  to  lay  emphatic  stress  on  the  one- 
ness of  our  source.  "  God,"  says  S.  Paul  to  the  el  'iie 
of  a  nation  who  prided  themselves  on  the  tradition 
tliat  their  ancestors  had  sprung  out  of  tlic  soil  of 
•j^^ica,  and  who  looked  upon  tlie  Jew  as  something 


Origin  of  Woman. 


Ill 


not  to  be  classified  in  the  same  category  of  being  with 
themselves — "  God  made  out  of  one  " — not  merely 
"of  one  blood/'  but  "by  derivation  from  a  single 
ancestor" — "every  nation  of  men  for  to  dwell  upon 
all  the  face  of  the  earth  "  (Acts  xvii.  26). 

•  So  earnestly,  indeed,  do  the  sacred  writers  insist 
upon  this,  that  they  will  not  allow  us  to  trace  our 
descent  to  Adam  and  Eve,  and  there  to  stop.  Eve 
herself  must  be  traced  to  Adam.  Woma.n,  according 
to  Holy  Scripture,  owes  her  origin  to  a  definitely 
creative  act  on  the  part  of  God,  like  man  himself ; 
but  her  creation  is  not  independent  of  his.  It  is 
the  man  who  is  created  "the  image  and  glory  of 
God;  but  the  woman  is  the  glory  of  the  man" 
(1  Cor.  xi.  7).  The  man  contains  within  himself 
all  that  is,  in  the  moral  sense,  characteristic  of  the 
woman  also ;  but  for  his  enriching  and  perfecting, 
for  the  emphatic  bringing  out  and  development  of 
his  ''glory" — that  is,  of  what  was  best  in  him — 
woman  is  taken  out  from  him  and  given  existence  in 
a  separate  form.  While  revealed  religion  strenuously 
asserts  the  spiritual  equality  of  women  with  men, — 
as  it  teaches  the  equality  of  barbarian  with  Greek, 
or  of  bond  with  free,  the  accidental  circumstances  of 
the  soul's  position  making  no  difference  to  the  soul's 
intrinsic  dignity; — yet  it  asserts  with  equal  clear- 
ness that  womanhood  occupies  a  subordinate  position 
to  manhood  in  the  economy  of  the  race.  It  has  been 
held  that  while  manhood  represents  the  creative  ele- 
ment, the  point  of  new  departure,  Vv^omanhood  represents 
rather  the  traditional  element,  the  abiding  groundwork 


1 1 2  Position  of  Woman. 


of  human  nature.  If  there  be  any  truth  in  this,  it 
shows  far-reaching  significance  in  S.  Paul's  saying, 
"Adam  was  first  formed,  then  Eve  "  (1  Tim.  ii.  13). 
Though  himself  formed  from  the  dust,  man  did  not 
mingle  with  the  dust  again.  His  bride  owed  her  origin 
to  nothing  less  than  himself — himself  in  his  newly 
given  dignity.  "  The  mother  of  all  living "  (Gen.  iii. 
20),  took  shape  from  him,  her  fountain-head.  Close 
and  recent  as  was  Adam's  cousinship  to  the  lower 
forms  that  surrounded  him,  they  gave  him  no  solace 
or  sympathy;  but  in  Eve  he  recognises  at  once  all 
that  is  most  loveable  in  himself  set  forth  before  him 
in  a  form  that  he  could  love  with  self-sacrifice  and 
without  selfishness.  "This,  at  last,  is  bone  of  my 
bones,  and  fle^h  of  my  flesh:  she  shall  be  called 
Woman,  because  she  was  taken  out  of  Man.  There- 
fore shall  a  man  leave  his  father  and  mother,  and  shall 
cleave  unto  his  wife  :  and  they  shall  be  one  flesh " 
(Gen.  ii.  23,  24).  Thus  what  seemed  to  threaten  a 
division  in  human  nature,  conduces  to  a  richer  unity. 

§9- 

The  children  born  of  this  union  inherit  the  one 
common  nature,  but  that  nature  infinitely  diversified. 
In  past  years  it  was  a  much-debated  question  whether 
the  soul  of  the  child  is  derived  from  its  parents,  or 
whether  it  is  a  direct  creation  of  God.  Tlie  former 
opinion  is  known  as  Traducianism,  the  latter  as 
Creatianism.  The  truth  appears  to  lie  in  the  union 
of  the  two  beliefs. 


Creation  of  Individuals,  1 1 3 


Each  human  personaHty  is  the  direct  creation  of 
the  Ahiiighty,  who  has  been  pleased  to  call  such  a> 
being  into  existence,  and  to  give  it  its  special  and 
individual  characteristics.  But  these  characteristics 
as  well  as  the  common  nature  that  is  modified  by 
them,  come  in  no  sudden  or  violent  manner.  They 
are  the  result — we  may  say,  the  inevitable  result 
— of  the  forces  at  work  in  the  generations  before. 
Human  nature  is  a  rich  material  to  work  upon ; 
and  the  diversities  that  may  be  brought  out  in  it 
through  various  combinations  are  endless.  God's 
creative  power  is  as  much  seen  in  effecting  these 
combinations,  so  as  to  produce  the  diversities,  as 
in  the  original  act  by  which  He  breathed  into  the 
nostrils  of  the  thing  which  he  had  formed  of  the 
dust.  Our  religion  is  entirely  opposed  to  the  Deistic 
notion  that  God  at  the  beginning  started  the  species 
on  its  course,  and  then  stood  aside  and  allowed  it  to 
develope  by  mechanical  laws  or  by  its  own  caprice. 
His  providence  is  incessantly  at  work  even  in  the 
smallest  details  of  history,  not  by  a  number  of 
arbitrary  fiats,  but  by  continuous  and  orderly  pro- 
cesses of  gentle  manipulation.  As  we  have  shown 
the  immanence  of  the  Divine  Word  in  nature  to  be 
the  principle  which  carries  nature  along  without  con- 
fusions or  interruptions,  so  it  is  with  the  life  of  man- 
kind. Each  human  being  is  the  vehicle  of  a  special 
manifestation  of  the  Word,  and  each  has  been  the 
object  of  the  special  forethought  of  God.  It  is  not 
only  of  great  prophets,  but  of  every  person  on  earth, 
though  with  a  different  shade  of  meaning,  that  the 

I 


114     Creatianism  ignores  Original  Sin. 


saying  to  Jeremiah  holds  true :  "  Before  I  formed  thee 
in  the  womb,  I  knew  thee  "  (J ei\  i.  5). 

§  10. 

This  tempering  of  the  Creatianist  with  the  Tradu- 
cian  belief  helps  us  to  understand  the  Church's 
doctrine  of  original  sin.  Upon  the  Creatianist  theory 
alone,  the  universality  of  sin  would  be  inexplicable. 
If  the  soul  comes  entirely  fresh  from  the  hands  of  the 
Creator,  without  dependence  upon  its  earthly  parent- 
age, how  com.es  it  to  exhibit  evil  tendencies  from 
earliest  infancy  ?  Is  it  possible  for  God  to  create — 
in  the  sense  of  an  entirely  fresh  origination — a  thing 
which  is  morally  faulty  ?  Or,  on  the  Pelagian  as- 
sumption that  the  new-born  infant  is  not  morally 
faulty,  how  comes  it  that  no  single  human  being, 
except  Christ,  has  been  able  to  withstand  temptation  ? 
On  the  Creatianist  theory  pure  and  simple,  every 
child  must  come  into  life  v>dth  as  fair  a  field  as  the 
first  man  had,  except  for  the  prevalence  of  bad  ex- 
amples all  around — for  the  differences  which  scholastic 
theology  devised  were  based  upon  an  unwarranted  con- 
ception of  what  Adam's  state  was — and  every  child 
must  submit  to  the  test  for  himself,  as  if  it  were  the 
first  time  that  any  one  had  been  tested.  Surely  if 
this  had  been  the  case,  and  human  beings  had  such 
independence  of  each  other,  the  "  following  of  Adam  " 
would  not  have  prevailed  so  universally.  Here  and 
there  at  least  we  should  have  expected  to  see  an  un- 
fallen  specimen  of  humanity.  Out  of  a  million  million 
of  Adams  we  could  not  think  that  all  would  go  wrong. 


Truth  of  Traducianism.  1 1 5 


But  in  point  of  fact  that  theory  ignores  the  unity 
of  the  human  race.  It  makes  our  relation  to  each 
other  a  merely  external  and  fantastic  one.  If  human 
parentage  does  nothing  more  than  provide  physical 
organisms  into  which  beings  from  some  other  region 
are  introduced,  mankind  is  only  a  nominal  thing ;  it  is 
but  a  temporary  classification  of  spirits  accidentally 
thrown  together  and  united  only  by  transitory 
interests.  The  love  of  parents  to  children,  and  of 
children  to  their  parents,  rises  up  against  so  unnatural 
a  doctrine.  We  are  bound  to  think  that  the  inward 
as  well  as  the  outward  life  of  men  is  one,  and  is 
transmitted  from  generation  to  generation.  And  this 
being  so,  the  father  can  'transmit  to  his  son  only  the 
life  which  is  his  own.  He  transmits  humanity,  not 
in  its  ideal,  but  in  its  actual  condition,  in  the  form 
in  which  he  himself  has  it.  This  is  significantly 
brought  out  in  the  book  of  Genesis,  where,  after 
saying  that  Adam  was  made  in  the  image  and  after 
the  likeness  of  God  (i.  26),  it  tells  us  that  Adam,  now 
fallen,  "  begat  in  his  own  likeness,  ciftev  his  image 
(v.  3).  The  similarity  of  character  was  already  there  ; 
it  was  now  the  original  constitution  which  was  harder 
to  be  recovered. 

So  in  practice  we  find  it.  The  offspring  favours 
the  parent  (with  the  natural  differences),  not  only  in 
feature,  and  form,  and  voice,  and  gait,  and  little 
tricks  of  manner — partly  imitated,  it  may  be,  yet 
partly  inherited — but  also  in  intellectual  parts,  in 
tastes  and  inclinations,  in  moral  bent.  As  the  son's 
body  inherits  ixot,  perhaps,  his  father  s  consumption 


1 1 6  Nature  of  Original  Sin. 


or  gout,  but  the  peculiar  liability  to  it,  so  his  soul 
lies  specially  open  to  the  sins  which  were  his  father  s 
and  his  grandfather's  curse.  When  drunkenness,  or 
violent  temper,  or  covetousness,  have  had  unre- 
strained sway  in  a  family  for  two  or  three  generations, 
the  descendant  stands  in  a  much  worse  position  for 
resisting  those  forms  of  temptation  than  another  man 
might.  The  natural  defences  of  his  soul  are  broken 
down.  In  the  language  of  old  theologians,  th.QfTeniim 
ciipiditotiim,  the  bridle  of  the  desires,  is  no  longer 
born  in  him.  And  that  which  we  see  visibly,  in 
special  instances,  and  with  regard  to  particular  forms 
of  sin,  we  are  taught  to  be  equally  true  of  sin  in 
general  throughout  the  race.  Each  soul  has  its  own 
particular  weakness,  but  all  alike  are  weak.  And  not 
weak  only,  but  depraved  and  distorted  and  wrong. 

We  must  not,  indeed,  mistake.  The  Church  never 
teaches  that  the  guilt  of  Adam's  sin  is  imputed 
to  his  progeny,  as  if  in  some  way  they  were  held 
responsible  for  it,  and  deserved  punishment  for  it 
although  themselves  innocent  of  it.  Such  teaching 
would  be  a  shocking  travesty  of  the  Catholic  belief. 
If  we  are  "  by  nature  children  of  wrath  "  (Eph.  ii.  3), 
it  is  to  be  referred  to  no  such  artificial  and  unrighteous 
arrangement,  but  to  the  fact  of  the  solidarity  of  the 
liuman  race.  It  is  vain  to  speculate  whether,  if  Eve 
had  stood  firm,  or  if  Adam  had  repudiated  his  wife's 
action,  the  race  would  thereby  have  been  established 
and  secured  from  danger  of  subsequent  falling,  or 
whether  the  conflict  would  liave  been  renewed  over 
cacli  individual  with  a  hope  of  detaching  one  here 


Reality  of  Htiman  Freedom,         1 1 7 


and  one  there  from  the  noble  species.  But  the  con- 
verse is  certainly  true,  that  the  fall  of  our  "  first 
father  "  (Isa.  xliii.  27)  was  the  fall  of  us  all,  and  that 
"  by  the  one  man's  disobedience  the  many  were  con- 
stituted sinners (Rom.  v.  19).  From  that  time 
forth  every  human  being  but  One  has  been  conceived 
in  sin,  and  has  come  into  the  world  with  a  more  or 
less  vitiated  and  depraved  nature,  upon  which,  accord- 
ingly, God  s  holiness  cannot  but  look  with  displeasure, 
however  blent  with  pity.  And  that  which  was  by 
birth  our  misfortune  has  become  by  choice  our  fault. 
The  tendency  which  a  discerning  eye  would  have  seen 
in  us  at  our  very  conception  has  been  verified ;  and, 
by  embracing  and  approving  the  defect  of  our  nature, 
we  have  become  verily  guilty. 

§11- 

The  true  harmony  between  Creatianism  and  Tradu- 
cianism  suggests  the  lines  which  must  lead  eventually 
to  the  harmony  between  necessity  and  free-will.  Our 
personal  freedom  is  a  fact  within  our  cognisance. 
We  are  conscious  of  making  acts  of  choice  all  day 
long.  We  deliberate  freely,  and  take  the  advice  of 
friends,  and  feel  that  we  are  actually  responsible  for 
what  we  have  done  or  left  undone.  No  sophistica- 
tion really  persuades  the  conscience  to  acquiesce  in 
wrong-doing  as  inevitable ;  or,  at  least,  if  a  man  can 
persuade  himself  that  it  is  so  in  his  own  case,  he 
does  not  when  the  wrong-doer  is  his  neighbour  and 
himself  the  sufferer.    We  know  that  we  are  free. 

Yet  the  stoutest  champion  of  free-will  cannot 


1 1 8       Conditions  of  human  Freedom. 


assert  that  the  free-will  is  unconditioned.  It  is 
exerted  within  limitations,  and  accurate  thought 
tends  to  make  the  limitations  more  and  more  close. 
My  freedom  is  not  an  absolute  freedom,  but  the 
freedom  proper  to  me.  It  is  the  freedom  of  a  man ; 
not  the  freedom  of  God  on  the  one  hand,  nor  the 
freedom  of  an  animal  on  the  other.  I  cannot  choose 
to  create  a  world,  nor  can  I  choose  to  fly.  I  am  only 
able  to  choose  what  lies  within  the  powers  of  humanity. 
Nor,  indeed,  is  my  freedom  as  wide  as  the  limits  of 
humanity.  It  is  modified  by  my  being  an  English- 
man, of  the  nineteenth  century,  a  middle-aged  man, 
born  in  a  certain  station  of  life,  the  son  of  certain 
parents,  educated  after  a  particular  fashion,  sur- 
rounded by  my  own  surroundings,  influenced  by  my 
own  past  acts  of  choice.  Both  within  and  without 
there  are  forces  which  give  a  special  direction  to  my 
will. 

Some  of  the  very  conditions  which  in  a  certain 
sense  restrict  a  man,  in  another  sense  heighten  and 
elate  his  sense  of  freedom.  Praise  him  for  acting 
like  a  man  and  an  Englishman ;  tell  him  that  he  is  a 
man  of  the  day,  his  fathers  true  son;  and  he  will 
feel  pleased  and  flattered,  and  endeavour  to  act  in  the 
same  way  again.  He  reckons  himself  free  from  all 
tliwarting  influences  Avhen  he  acts  according  to  the 
law  of  his  true  self.  But  there  is  one  thing  which  has 
come  in  to  qualify  his  freedom,  which  ought  never 
to  have  been  there.  He  does  not  choose  with  the 
lilicrty,  however  restricted,  of  a  perfect  man.  It  is 
l)ut  tlio  liberty  of  a  maimed  and  paralysed  nature. 


Mans  Fall  not  irrecoverable,  119 


He  naturally  wills  with  a  bias  towards  evil — ^at  least 
in  some  directions.  To  act  according  to  the  perfection 
of  nature  would  be  the  true  freedom.  And  this  man 
has  lost.  He  recognises  that  he  is  not  his  true  self. 
It  is  only  with  difficulty  that  he  works  towards  it 
again.  By  the  fall  of  Adam,  the  will,  which  before 
was  conditioned  but  free,  is  now  not  only  conditioned 
but  enslaved.  Nothing  but  the  action  of  grace  can 
free  it.  To  this  subject  we  must  recur  when  we  treat 
of  the  doctrine  of  grace. 

§12. 

All  the  flood  of  beings,  then,  to  whom  Adam  has 
transmitted  his  nature  are  evil  and  sinful.  The  evil 
penetrates  their  moral  fibre,  their  flesh  and  blood, 
their  imagination  and  intelligence,  their  very  con- 
science and  spirit.  And  yet  amidst  all  this  woeful 
ruin  there  are  signs  of  hope.  Men  are  not  in  the 
condition  of  devils.  Here  and  there,  indeed,  some 
men  have  attained,  as  has  been  terribly  said,  to  "  a 
disinterested  love  of  evil.''  But  they  are  few,  and 
they  were  not  born  so.  Human  nature,  though  fallen, 
has  not  lost  its  true  prerogative  and  characteristic. 
Although  it  no  longer  naturally  developes  into  the 
Divine  likeness,  but  the  opposite,  yet  it  still  retains 
the  Divine  image,  broken  and  obscured,  but  remaining. 
Even  in  doing  evil,  we  are  sorry  for  it,  and  feel  it  to 
be  unworthy  of  us.  While  this  remains  there  is  some- 
thing that  can  be  laid  hold  of.  Man,  though  lost,  is 
still  capable  of  being  saved. 


Chapter  V. 


"Eijt  Incarnation  of  t^c  SKSorti  of  ffioli, 

I/o/e  of  Recovoy  for  the  Falle7i  Race— Preparation  for  the  Incarnation 
—  Teleology  of  History — Miraculous  Conception  of  Christ — The 
Incarnate  Word  the  same  Person  as  before— Imperso7iality  of  His 
Human  Nature — Union  of  the  Two  Natures  not  effected  by  Conver- 
sion of  the  Godhead  into  Flesh — nor  by  Confusion  of  the  Two — 7ior 
by  Absorption  of  the  Human  in  the  Divine — Perfectncss  of  both 
Natures — the  Human  capable  of  receivi^ig  the  Divi7ie — the  Divi7ie 
acco77i7nodated  to  the  Hu7?ia7i  by  Vohmtary  Li77iitation, 

§1. 

The  fragmentary  good  which  the  Fall  has  left  in  man 
is  not  sufficient  to  enable  man  to  save  himself.  His 
spiritual  faculties  are  not  destroyed ;  but  they  are  so 
sprained  and  weakened  that  they  would  be  unable  to 
assert  their  rightful  mastery  unless  aided  from  with- 
out. And  man's  will  is  not  only  too  much  enfeebled 
to  set  itself  persistently  to  recover  those  faculties,  but 
(in  varying  degrees  in  different  persons  and  races)  it 
is  positively  bent  in  an  opposite  direction.  It  natu- 
rally seeks  to  make  self  its  centre;  and,  though  it  would 
have  no  objection  to  God,  if  God  would  acconnnodate 
Himself  to  its  convenience  and  keep  the  place  we 
choose  to  assign  to  Him — yet,  when  it  finds  the 


Mans  Need  of  Divine  Help.  121 


nature  and  extent  o£  His  claims,  man's  self-will 
resents  them,  and  carries  the  resentment  o£  them  so 
far  as  actually  to  dislike  Him  who  makes  them.  The 
statement  of  S.  Paul  proves  accurately  true,  that 
the  carnal  mind  is  enmity  towards  God,  for  it  does 
not  submit  to  Gods  law,  and  in  fact  it  cannot'' 
(Rom.  viii.  7). 

To  enable  it  therefore  once  more  to  submit  to 
God's  law,  and  so  attain  the  true  creaturely  freedom, 
which  is  salvation,  man  needs  a  Saviour.  And,  if  so, 
there  is  but  one  direction  to  which  he  can  hopefully 
turn.  The  inexorable  foes  who  wrought  his  ruin  will 
take  no  pity  on  him,  or  undo  what  they  have  done. 
No  remedy  for  his  plight  can  be  found  in  a  closer 
observance  or  better  application  of  the  laws  of  nature. 
No  specimen  member  of  the  tainted  race  rises  high 
enough  above  his  fellows  to  restore  them  to  their 
normal  condition ;  nor  can  any  association  of  men, 
on  the  natural  basis,  do  more  than  partially  restrain 
the  outward  activity  of  evil ;  it  cannot  cure  the  souls 
of  its  members.  God  alone  is  able  to  repair  the 
mischief  which  man  has  inflicted  on  creation  and 
himself.  The  great  message  of  the  Gospel  is  that 
God  is  not  only  able  so  to  do,  but  willing  also ;  and 
that  He  has,  in  fact,  done  it,  in  the  Person  of  His  Son 
Incarnate. 

§2. 

S.  Paul's  favourite  expression  about  ''the  fulness 
of  the  times "  teaches  us  that  the  providence  of  God 
had  long  been  preparing  for  the  Incarnation.  There 


122     Preparation  for  the  Incarnation. 


was  nothing  abrupt  and  violent  in  the  circumstances 
of  its  accomplishment.  The  whole  course  of  things, 
however  little  understood  by  men,  led  directly  up 
to  it. 

On  the  one  side,  a  mysterious  phrase  in  the 
Gospel  of  S.  John  teaches  us  that  there  was  some 
Divine  process  by  which  the  adorable  Person  who  was 
to  come  was  made  ready  for  His  mission.  "  Say  ye 
of  Him  whom  the  Father  sanctified  and  sent  into  the 
world.  Thou  blasphemest,  because  I  said,  I  am  the  Son 
of  God  ? "  (S.  John  x.  36).  What  constituted  that  con- 
secration and  equipment  of  the  Eternal  Son  remains  a 
secret  into  which  we  cannot  look. 

But  the  Word  was  also  f ashionino^  thinp^s  on  earth 
for  His  manifestation — first  in  those  long  processes,  of 
which  we  have  spoken,  which  led  up  to  the  formation 
of  man,  and  then  in  human  history.  It  might  have 
been  thought  that  the  fall  of  man  rendered  him 
incapable  of  receiving  the  Incarnation;  but  it  was 
not  so.  He  w^as  still  possessed  of  reason  and  of 
conscience  and  of  will,  though  not  in  full  perfection ; 
and  the  mercy  which  could  educate  those  powers  was 
not  withdrawn  from  him.  "  The  Life,"  which  was 
observable  in  the  constitution  of  things,  and  which 
came  from  the  immanence  of  the  Word,  "was  the 
Light  of  men  ;  and  the  Light  shineth  in  the  darkness, 
and  the  darkness  did  not  overtake  it "  (S.  John.  i.  4,  5). 
There  was  a  moment,  or  there  were  moments,  when 
it  seemed  as  if  the  light  would  be  wholly  quenched. 
But  it  never  came  to  pass.  "  The  true  Light "  still 
*^  was,  wliich  enlighteneth  every  man,  as  it  cometh 


Training  of  the  Heathen, 


123 


into  the  world."  No  single  human  being  has  been 
left  altoofether  destitute  o£  the  illumination.  In 
various  degrees,  and  in  a  multitude  o£  ways,  the 
truth  has  pressed  itself  upon  all  men;  and  in  whatever 
shape  it  has  come  to  them,  it  was  a  manifestation  of 
that  one  and  the  same  Eternal  Word,  and  a  prophecy 
^f  His  drawing  nearer  still. 

The  heathen — that  is,  the  mass  of  mankind — had 
their  appropriate  discipline.  They  were  left  to  them- 
selves. "  In  the  generations  gone  by,"  said  S.  Paul 
to  the  Lycaonian  pagans,  *'God  suffered  all  the 
nations  to  walk  in  their  own  ways,"  although  He 
bore  such  testimony  to  Himself  as  they  might  gather 
from  the  bounties  of  nature  (Acts  xiv.  16).  They 
knew  enough  of  God  to  distinguish  Him  from  His 
works,  and  to  worship  Him  with  thankfulness,  if  they 
would  (Rom.  i.  21,  25).  Right  and  wrong  vv^ere 
familiar  notions  to  them,  and  the  inward  verdict  of 
conscience  made  them  feel  at  ease  or  not  at  ease 
according  to  their  moral  conduct,  as  if  by  a  living 
code  of  law  (Rom.  ii.  14,  15).  Their  self-invented 
ritual,  and  even  to  a  certain  extent  their  mythology, 
formed  a  kind  of  elementary  training,  preparing  them 
for  something  better  (Gal.  iv.  8,  9).  Lawgivers  and 
philosophers  took  them  in  hand.  Here  and  there  a 
choice  and  gifted  soul  among  them  received  some- 
thing which  S.  Paul  recognises  as  a  form  of  inspira- 
tion, and  became  "  a  prophet  of  their  own  "  (Titus  i. 
12).  Thus  left  to  their  own  devices,  they  found 
and  showed  what  men  could  do  and  what  men  could 
not  do.    Their  successes  and  their  hopeless  failures 


124 


Training  of  Israel. 


alike  witnessed  to  the  possibility  and  the  need  of  a 
redemption. 

Meanwhile  the  way  for  that  redemption  was  more 
markedly  preparing  in  the  history  of  the  Israelite 
race.  That  race  was  naturally  well  qualified  for  its 
high  purpose.  It  had  what  has  been  called  a  genius 
for  religion.  Upon  them,  therefore,  the  Divine  choice 
fell ;  and  from  Abraham  onwards  they  were  by  un- 
mistakeable  signs  and  wonders  singled  out  and  set 
apart  from  all  other  nations  to  be  the  medium  of 
God's  self-revelation  to  the  world.  While  mankind 
in  general  was  left  to  find  its  own  way,  Israel  felt 
himself  to  be  the  people  of  the  Lord,  and  bound  to 
Him  in  the  strictest  bonds  of  duty.  But  this  special 
nearness  to  God  did  not  put  the  Chosen  People  in  any 
position  of  moral  superiority  over  others.  It  did  not 
exclude  from  them  the  liability  to  sin,  or  even  give 
them  much  help  to  overcoming  it.  Indeed,  the  object 
of  the  Law  which  was  given  them  was  nothing  else 
but  this — to  bring  vividly  home  to  them  a  sense  of 
their  sinfulness  and  infirmity.  They  were  to  learn 
by  it  that,  beneath  their  legal  observance,  their 
covenanted  privilege,  their  correct  belief,  the  Jew  was 
no  better  than  the  Gentile.  This  was  the  price 
which  they  had  to  pay  for  their  prerogative.  You 
only  have  I  known  of  all  the  families  of  the  earth ; 
therefore  I  will  visit  upon  you  all  your  iniquities" 
(Amos  iii.  2).  They  were  made  to  know,  on  behalf 
of  all  mankind,  the  guilt  and  shame  of  sin.  An 
elaborate  system  of  sacrifice  inculcated  the  feeling. 
Wliether  that  system  was  complete  from  tlie  outset. 


The  Law  and  the  Prophets.  125 


or,  according  to  the  risky  theories  of  a  modern  school 
of  critics,  received  its  full  development  at  a  later 
date,  makes  no  difference  to  the  deep  and  prophetic 
suggestiveness  of  its  symbolism.  And  the  spiritually 
minded  Hebrew  felt,  as  he  used  it,  that  it  disappointed 
him.  It  spoke  of  a  release  and  a  restoration  which 
it  never  accomplished.  The  worshippers  felt  it  to  be 
an  unsubstantial  shadow  in  itself,  and  yearned  for 
something  which  should  in  reality  "  fulfil what  this 
Divinely  instituted  ceremonial  taught  them  to  think 
of,  but  could  not  supply. 

And  what  the  Levitical  worship  taught  through 
visible  signs,  the  prophets  taught  in  mysterious  words 
Prophecy  was  the  special  glory  of  the  Israelite  people. 
Unlike  the  heathen  nations,  who  looked  back  wist- 
fully to  a  dim  golden  age  in  the  past,  the  whole  mind 
and  soul  of  Abraham's  descendants  were  anchored  to 
the  future.  Faith — "the  assurance  of  things  hoped 
for,  the  proof  of  things  not  seen (Heb.  xi.  1) — was 
their  very  life.  The  nation  was  forward-bound. 
Their  day  was  coming.  It  had  been  promised  to 
Abraham,  and,  though  it  might  tarry,  it  would  come. 
Every  partial  deliverance,  every  partial  deliverer, 
became  to  them — like  their  religious  system  itself — 
a  type  of  the  perfect  that  was  to  come.  Vague  and 
indefinite  at  first,  their  conception  became  richer  and 
clearer  with  succeeding  centuries.  Each  promising 
young  king,  or  venerable  priest,  or  woe-stricken 
prophet,  added  some  detail  to  the  ideal  that  was 
gradually  forming,  and  for  which  at  last  a  name  was 
found.    A  Messiah — anointed  with  the  Spirit  of  God 


126  Teleology  of  History. 


beyond  all  others — would  bring  all  that  was  looked 
for.  Not  that  we  have  reason  to  suppose  that  any- 
consistent  and  comprehensive  set  of  beliefs  had 
gathered  about  the  name  of  the  Christ.  The  prophets 
themselves  had  not  been  able  fully  to  grasp  their  own 
thoughts.  Here  and  there  a  touch,  a  glimpse,  a  flash, 
came  to  them ;  but  they  could  not  piece  it  all  together. 
They  only  felt,  with  such  longing  as  made  Daniel 
swoon  away,  that  what  they  uttered  was  true,  -and 
that  in  due  time  others  who  came  after  them  would 
see  and  profit  by  it  (1  S.  Pet.  i.  10-12). 

§3. 

The  more  outward  preparation  of  mankind, 
through  the  fortunes  of  empires,  belongs,  perhaps, 
rather  to  history  than  to  theology.  We  need  not 
now  stay  to  point  out  the  influences  of  the  Egyptian 
bondage,  or  the  Babylonian  captivity,  upon  the 
Hebrews;  or  the  effect  of  Greek  conquests  and  the 
spread  of  the  Greek  language,  and  of  the  universal 
dominion  of  Rome;  or  of  the  dispersion  of  the  Jews. 
This  side  of  the  Praeparatio  Evangelica  has  often 
been  worked  out ;  and  undoubtedly  it  aftbrds  a  m^ost 
impressive  testimony  to  the  Christian  faith.  On  the 
assumption  that  our  Lord  was  what  we  believe  Him 
to  be,  nothing  can  be  more  reasonable  than  to  suppose 
that  all  these  movements  on  the  large  scale  had  a 
distinct  teleological  aim,  and  that  they  had  reference 
to  Him.  There  was  nothing  accidental  in  the  fitness 
of  the  world's  condition  when  our  Lord  was  born. 
Though  the  historical  development  was  perfectly  free 


MiractUoics  Conception  of  Christ.     1 2  7 


and  spontaneous,  there  was  a  Providence  which  knew 
how  to  guide  it.  And  yet,  with  all  this  perfect  adap- 
tation of  circumstances,  our  Lord  was  no  necessary 
or  merely  natural  outcome  of  His  time  and  place. 
As,  in  the  beginning,  the  world  was  made  ready  for 
the  reception  of  human  life  before  human  Hfe  ap- 
peared, and  yet  human  life  was  an  entirely  new 
factor  introduced  from  without,  so,  when  the  fulness 
of  the  time  came,'*  and  not  before,  ''God  sent  forth. 
His  Son,  born  of  a  woman (Gal.  iv.  4.),  and  yet  not 
by  the  action  of  simply  natural  laws. 

§4. 

The  new  point  of  departure  in  history  is  marked 
by  the  miraculous  mode  of  Christ  s  birth.  He  was 
''conceived  by  the  Holy  Ghost"  (St.  Matt.  i.  20). 
Though  the  whole  office  of  motherhood  was  performed 
by  Mary,  from  the  initial  consent  onwards,  there  was 
nothing  at  all  resembling  human  fatherhood.  The 
act  which  brought  the  Godhead  into  flesh  was  a 
purely  creative  act,  like  those  at  the  beginning  of 
the  world.  It  was  due  to  the  operation  of  that 
Divine  Spirit,  who  is  the  Finger  of  God,  moulding 
all  things  as  He  wills,  and  imparting  life  in  all  its 
forms. 

This  miraculous  intervention  is  not  entirely  due 
to  the  presence  of  sin  in  humanity.  If  there  had  been 
no  Fall,  and  the  Word  had  still  been  pleased  to  become 
incarnate  by  a  birth,  that  birth  would  fittingly  have 
been  of  a  virgin,  because  so  only  would  it  be  clear 
that  a  new  thing  was  taking  place  on  earth,  and  One 


128    His  Sanctity  not  dependent  on  Marys. 


coming  into  the  world  who  was  not  simply  man. 
•And  the  absence  of  earthly  fatherhood  appears  also 
to  accord  well  with  that  impersonal  universality  of 
our  Lord's  human  nature  of  which  we  shall  have 
to  speak.  Supposing  that  the  Nestorian  notion  of 
Christ's  Person  were  the  right  one,  and  Christ  had 
been,  in  the  ordinary  sense,  "  a  man,"  associated 
with  the  Word,  there  would  have  been  little  need 
for  the  virgin  birth, — to  secure  a  sinless  father  as 
well  as  mother  might  have  been  enough;  but  for 
the  true  Incarnation  no  other  entrance  into  the  world 
is  imaginable  but  that  which  was  chosen. 

No  manner  of  sin  entered  into  the  movement  of 
will  which  issued  in  Christ's  holy  nativity.  That 
maiden  life  which  gave  our  Lord  birth  was  entirely 
holy.  It  was  the  flower  which  sprang  out  of  all 
the  preparatory  discipline  which  mankind  —  which 
Israel — had  undergone.  It  was  the  most  beautiful 
thing  which  had  been  seen  since  the  expulsion  from 
Paradise.  Yet  our  Lord's  original  stainlessness  was 
not  absolutely  dependent  upon  the  holiness  of  His 
sacred  Mother,  in  such  a  way  as  to  be  a  purely  natural 
heirloom  fron  her  as  sin  is  from  other  parents.  It 
was  fitting,  indeed,  that  the  Mother  of  the  Lord 
should  be  the  highest  specimen  of  humanity ;  she 
would  not  have  been  chosen  for  the  honour  had  she 
been  otherwise ;  but  in  no  case  could  any  taint  from 
her  have  attached  itself  to  the  Divine  Person  of  her 
Oflspring.  It  seems,  in  fact,  to  be  the  delight  of 
S.  Matthew,  in  tracing  tlie  genealogy  of  Clu'ist,  to  call 
attention  to  the  unholy  and  profane  cliannels  through 


S.  Bernard  on  the  Conception  of  Ma7y.  129 


which,  after  the  flesh,  He  came.  The  incestuous 
Tamar  and  the  harlot  Rahab,  Ruth  the  heatheness 
and  "  the  wife  of  Urias/'  are  the  only  ancestresses 
whom  he  mentions.  The  purity  of  the  last  stage  in 
the  transmission  was  not  actually  more  necessary  to 
our  Lord's  incorruption  than  that  of  earlier  stages. 
The  Holy  Ghost  could  only  take  from  the  maternal 
substance  such  elements  as  were  befitting  to  the 
Incarnate  Son,  and  would  purify  them  in  taking. 
We  have  no  need,  therefore,  to  assume  the  immacu- 
late conception  of  Mary  herself. 

The  first  objection  to  pressing  that  doctrine  upon 
the  Church  is  that  it  is  nowhere  taught  in  Holy 
Scripture,  nor  by  any  ancient  Father, — although,  as 
S.  Bernard  points  out,  the  doctrine  is  not  one 
which  the  Fathers  could  have  passed  by  with  unani- 
mous silence,  if  the  doctrine  had  been  true.  It 
arose  at  Lyons,  in  France,  in  the  twelfth  century ; 
and  the  local  festival  which  was  begun  in  honour 
of  it  w^as  greeted  by  S.  Bernard  as  "  a  presumptuous 
novelty — mother  of  rashness,  sister  of  superstition, 
daughter  of  frivolity."  He  complained  that  so  re- 
spected a  Church  as  that  of  Lyons  should  have 
"  allowed  itself  to  be  disfigured  by  such  juvenile 
levity,"  introducing  what  "is  unknown  to  Church 
practice,  unapproved  by  reason,  uncommended  by 
ancient  tradition."  The  royal  Virgin,  he  said,  had 
so  many  genuine  honours  that  she  stood  in  no 
need  of  spurious  ones.  That  she  was  sanctified  in 
the  womb,  he  held  in  common  with  most  Catholic 
believers,    and    that    she    w^as    preserved  sinless 

K 


130  Objections  to  Immaculate  Conception  of  Ma7y, 


throughout  her  life ;  but  this  did  not  of  necessity 
prove  her  exempt  from  original  sin.  If  the  acknow- 
ledged sanctity  of  her  birth  depended  on  the  sanctity 
of  the  antecedent  conception,  it  would  be  easy  to  go 
still  further  back,  and  argue  for  the  immaculate  con- 
ception of  her  parents,  and  of  her  grandparents,  and 
of  her  great -grandparents.  Her  conception  was  con- 
fessedly in  the  natural  order  of  things,  through  the 
marriage  union  of  her  parents,  and,  as  such,  could 
not  be  free  from  the  sin  which  now  penetrates  the 
whole  working  of  the  natural  order.  Indeed,  S.  Ber- 
nard thought  it  a  strange  mode  of  honouring  the 
Blessed  Virgin  to  teach  that  she  was  herself  immacu- 
lately conceived,  inasmuch  as  the  credit  of  it  Avould 
belong  to  another,  not  to  her.  It  robbed  her  of  the 
unique  distinction  wliich  she  possessed,  by  extend- 
ing to  her  mother  also  the  dignity  of  motherhood 
achieved  without  any  compensating  loss.  Mary  was 
no  longer  the  only  woman  who  had  conceived  without 
sin.  And  wliat  was  still  more  contrary  to  the  Chris- 
tian conscience,  this  novel  doctrine  took  away  a  pre- 
rogative which  belonged  to  Christ  alone.  "  The  Lord 
Jesus  alone,"  says  the  saint,  "was  conceived  of  the 
Holy  Ghost,  because  He  alone  was  holy  before  His 
conception.  He  alone  excepted,  it  holds  true  of  all 
the  rest  of  the  chiklren  of  Adam,  what  one  of  them 
confessed  with  as  much  truth  as  humility  concerning 
himself,  '  Behold,  I  was  shapen  in  iniquity,  and  in  sin 
liath  my  motlier  conceived  me.' 

So  S.  Bernard  reasoned.  However  much  tlie 
Catholic  miglit  be  inclined;  as  S.  Bernard  says  was  at 


That  Doctrine  insulates  Christ  from  its.     1 3 1 


first  the  case  with  him,  to  allow  as  a  pious  opinion 
what  seemed  to  be  suggested  by  love  of  our  Lord's 
Mother,  after-reflexion  shews  that  the  opinion  is  not 
pious,  but  detracts  from  the  fulness  of  Christ's  i^e- 
demption.  Not  only  does  it  make  the  Blessed  Virgin 
herself  exempt  from  original  sin,  and  therefore  exempt 
from  the  common  need  of  salvation ;  but  by  so  doing 
it  insulates  our  Lord  Himself  from  direct  touch  with 
the  sinful  world.  If  it  were  true,  the  regeneration  of 
humanity  would  begin,  not  with  Him,  but  with  her ; 
and,  instead  of  springing  sinless  out  of  the  sinful 
race  which  He  came  to  save.  He  would  derive  His 
humanity  from  something  not  like  the  rest  of  us* 
The  doctrine  would  make  His  human  sanctity;  in  a 
way,  dependent  upon  hers,  and  a  consequence  of  it. 
Thus  the  dogma  of  the  immaculate  conception  of 
Mary,  by  its  over-refinement,  would  put  Christ  at  a 
distance  from  us,  and  mutilate  the  blessed  fulness  of 
the  truth  that  He  is  the  Son  of  Man,''  and  that  all 
we  are  His  "  brethren." 

§5. 

By  the  action  of  the  Creator  Spirit  upon  the  sacred 
Virgin,  He  who  existed  from  all  eternity  as  God  with 
the  Father  became  also  Man  with  men.  The  Incarna- 
tion is  the  union  of  the  Godhead  with  human  nature 
in  the  single  Person  of  Christ.  It  is  a  totally  different 
thing  from  what  we  know  as  the  mystical  union  of 
men  with  God.  The  mystical  union  consists  in  a 
loving  apprehension  of  God  by  man,  in  response  to 
God's  apprehension  of  him,  which  results  in  an  iden- 


132    Hypostatic  Union  tmlike  Mystical. 


tity  of  will  between  the  two — or,  to  speak  more 
strictly,  in  an  identity  of  the  things  willed — idem 
velle  ac  nolle.  This  mystical  union  is,  indeed,  grounded 
upon  the  same  fact  as  the  Incarnation,  namely,  that 
man  is  made  in  the  Divine  image,  and  therefore  can 
enter  into  close  relationship  with  Grod.  But  for  all 
that,  the  hypostatic  (that  is,  the  personal)  union  is 
not  merely  a  higher  degree  of  the  mystical.  However 
fully  developed  the  mystical  union  may  be,  it  does 
not,  and  cannot,  break  down  the  distinction  of  per- 
sonality. It  would  be  mere  Pantheism  to  suppose  it. 
The  heart  may  have  perfect  sympathy  with  God,  the 
understanding  may  come  to  know  Him  even  as  He 
knows  us,  the  will  may  cease  to  have  a  movement 
but  that  which  He  inspires ;  and  yet  the  human 
person  remains  separate  from  the  Divine.  God,  in 
the  mystical  union,  does  not  become  the  man,  nor  the 
man  God.  It  does  not  set  up  a  single  centre  of  con- 
sciousness,— a  single  "  I," — which  perceives  itself  to 
be  identically  the  same  in  the  two  different  spheres  of 
its  operation,  in  the  Divine  and  in  the  human.  The 
two  personalities  remain  unalterably  distinct,  with 
free  interchange  between  them.  The  perfect  type  of 
the  mystical  union,  therefore,  is  rather  to  be  found  in 
the  relation  between  the  Father  and  the  Son,  than 
in  the  relation  beween  the  two  natures  of  Christ. 

To  think  otherwise  is  the  error  which  is  known  to- 
the  Church  by  the  title  of  Nestorianism.  Although 
Nestorius  did  not  formally  maintain  that  the  historical 
Christ  was  a  combination  of  two  associated  persons, 
one  human  and  the  other  Divine,  the  expressions 


The  Nestorian  Idea  of  Christ.  133 


which  he  used  can  bear  no  other  meaning.  Revolting 
from  the  orthodox  title  of  Theotohos  (roughly  rendered 
"  Mother  of  God ")  applied  to  the  Blessed  Virgin,  he 
maintained  that  she  gave  birth  to  something  which 
was  human  first,  and  afterwards  was  taken  into  "  con- 
junction "  with  the  Eternal  Word.  The  Eternal 
Word  appropriated  that  human  being  which  sprang 
from  Mary,  and  made  him  His  organ  and  instrument 
of  self-manif estation ;  the  humanity  became  His 
"  receptacle ; but  it  was  never  personally  united  with 
Himself.  The  man  who  suffered  and  was  buried  was 
so  open  to  the  Divine  communication  as  to  become 
like  an  embodiment  of  God  to  the  world  ;  he  was 
filled  with  the  Divine  energy  to  an  infinitely  greater 
extent  than  any  other  man;  his  conjunction  with 
God  was  so  intense  as  to  render  him  a  fit  object  for 
worship,  and  even  to  make  him  rank  as  God : but 
still  it  was  not  the  Word  Himself  who  suftered  and 
was  buried.  If  such  teaching  were  true,  it  is  clear 
that  there  was  never  any  real  Incarnation.  There 
was  but  an  alliance,  after  all,  between  a  man  and 
God;  there  was  no  actual  entrance  of  God  Himself 
into  human  conditions.  Thus  God,  under  the  system 
of  Nestorius,  remains  still  at  as  great  a  distance  from 
man  as  ever. 

As  against  this  disheartening  fiction,  the  Church 
clung  and  clings  firmly  to  the  plain  and  literal  mean- 
ing of  S.  John's  words,  supported  by  the  whole  tenor 
of  Scripture :  "  The  Word  was  made  flesh,  and  dwelt 
among  us"  (S.  John  i.  14).  It  is  evident  that  S.  John 
intends  to  set  before  us,  not  the  birth  of  a  remarkable 


134    Contimtity  of  Person  in  the  Incarnation. 


man,  but  a  stupendous  event  in  the  life  of  the  Eternal 
Word.  S.  John  is,  so  to  speak,  following  the  history 
of  that  Word ;  and,  after  speaking  of  creation  as  an 
incident  in  it,  and  giving  a  summary  of  His  previous 
dealings  with  the  world,  he  proceeds  to  say  that  that 
same  adorable  Person  who  "was  in  the  beginning 
with  God,"  Himself  "became  flesh,  and  dwelt  among 
us."  He  did  not  exhibit  Himself  through  another: 
He  became  human  Himself.  There  was  no  break  in 
the  continuity  of  His  personal  life.  It  was  one  and 
the  same  throughout.  He  who  pre-existed  "  in  the 
form  of  God  "  (Phil.  ii.  6)  took  upon  Himself  another 
form,  and  passed  through  a  fresh  series  of  experiences, 
without  any  loss  of  His  true  identity.  In  the  womb 
which  He  did  "  not  abhor,"  in  the  cradle  and  the 
carpenter  s  shop,  in  the  baptismal  stream  and  the 
wilderness  of  temptation,  in  the  miracles  of  power,  in 
the  still  greater  miracles  of  weakness,  entreating  with 
"  strong  crying  and  tears  "  in  Gethsemane,  pouring  out 
His  soul  unto  death  upon  the  Cross,  as  He  lay  dead  in 
the  sepulchre,  and  preached  to  the  spirits  in  prison, 
rising,  and  returning  to  heaven, — His  own  Person 
never  sank  into  abeyance,  nor  became  confused  with 
some  other,  created,  person  who  acted  as  His  earthly 
embodiment.  It  was  He — the  Word — who  did  and 
suffered  all  these  things.  "  He  that  descended  is  the 
same  also  that  ascended  up"  (Eph.  iv.  10) — "Jesus 
Christ,  the  same  yesterday,  and  to-day,  and  for  ever'* 
(Heb.  xiii.  8). 


Tmpersonality  of  the  Manhood.  135 


§6. 

In  order  to  guard  this  inestimable  truth,  the 
Church  has  learned  to  speak  of  our  Blessed  Lord's 
human  nature  as  impersonal.  The  expression  is 
a  difficult  one,  and  seems  at  first  to  imply  that  His 
humanity  was  defective,  and  not  the  same  as  ours. 
It  is,  however,  but  a  way  of  saying  what  is  expressed 
in  the  Quicumqite  vidt:  "He  is  not  two,  but  one  Christ." 
To  assert  that  our  Lord's  human  nature  had  a  per- 
sonality of  its  own,  independent  of  Him,  as  if  it  could 
conceivably  have  been  dissociated  from  Him  and  stood 
alone,  and  lived  out  its  own  life  like  any  other  man, 
occupying  some  other  relation  to  the  Godhead  from 
that  which  it  did  occupy,  would  be  to  nullify  the 
Incarnation.  The  purpose  of  the  Incarnation  is  not 
solely  to  exhibit  or  display  the  character  or  power 
of  God  to  men.  Perhaps  such  an  object  might  have 
been  effected  through  something  like  the  ''posses- 
sion ''  of  a  man  by  the  Word.  "  But  if  a  solid  union 
between  God  and  man  is  to  be  brought  about,  if  the 
Son  of  God  is  Himself  going  to  take  human  nature 
as  His  own,  if  in  His  own  Person  He  is  to  be 
''  the  Second  Man from  heaven  (1  Cor.  xv.  47),  and 
begin  a  new  departure  for  the  human  race,  then  it 
is  imperatively  necessary  that  we  should  conceive  of 
the  humanity  which  he  assumed  as  "impersonal" — 
that  is,  as  having  no  centre  of  consciousness  or  being 
apart  from  Him,  It  was  He  who  became  man,  who 
was  born  and  who  died,  not  another  person,  however 
closely  connected  with  Him. 


136         Analogy  of  Body  and  SotiL 


This  is  all  that  we  mean  by  the  "  impersonality  " 
of  Christ's  human  nature.  We  do  not  mean  by  it 
that  His  liuman  nature  was  an  unreality,  a  phantom, 
an  automaton,  made  to  go  through  the  semblance  of  a 
human  life,  and  worked  by  a  Divine  Person  outside  of 
it.  The  Church  does  not  substitute  a  Docetic  figment 
for  a  living  agent.  Better  the  honest  Nestorian  man 
than  such  a  neuter  thing.  A  personal  human  being 
would  make  a  worthier  medium  of  communication 
with  the  world.  The  phrase  simply  betokens  the 
unity  of  our  Lord's  Person,  not  a  defect  in  the  nature 
which  He  assumed. 

The  human  nature  stands  no  further  off  from  our 
Lord's  Person  than  the  Divine,  though  He  is  Divine 
first  and  human  after.  We  count  it  no  defect  in  our 
bodies  that  they  have  no  personal  subsistence  apart 
from  ourselves,  and  that,  if  separated  from  ourselves, 
they  are  nothing.  They  share  in  a  true  personal  life 
because  we,  whose  bodies  they  are,  are  persons. 
What  happens  to  them  happens  to  us.  The  analogy 
has  from  ancient  times  been  applied  to  the  mystery 
of  the  hypostatic  union  in  Christ.  "As  the  reason- 
able soul  and  flesh  is  one  man,  so  God  and  man  is 
one  Christ."  It  would  be  easy  to  press  the  analogy 
too  far ;  but  it  serves  its  purpose  in  reminding  us 
that  personality  is  a  thing  which  lies  very  deep  in  the 
background,  and  reaches  forth  through  various  organs, 
and  enters  into  more  than  one  range  of  experiences. 
The  relation  of  soul  to  body  in  us  is  not  the  same  as 
the  relation  of  the  Godhead  to  the  manhood  in  Christ ; 
ljut  it  lielps  us  to  see  how  the  liuman  nature  of  Christ 


In  what  Sense  Christ  ''a  Man!'  137 


possesses  personality  only  by  being  His,  and  how  He, 
in  it,  can  live  a  full  human  life. 

Indeed,  although  theologians  avoid  the  word  be* 
cause  it  is  liable  to  be  mistaken,  there  is  nothing 
untrue  in  describing  our  Lord  as  having,  in  the  Incar- 
nation, become  "  a  man."  So  He  is  called,  in  Holy 
Scripture,  both  in  passages  where  the  word  may  be 
taken  in  an  adjectival  or  predicative  sense,  as  in 
1  Tim.  ii.  5,  where  we  could  render  it  "  the  human 
Christ  Jesus,"  or  '-Christ  Jesus  who  is  Himself 
Man  ; "  and  also  in  several  places  which  do  not  admit 
of  such  a  treatment.  Not  only  is  He  so  called  by 
enemies,  or  as  yet  uninstructed  disciples,  but  He 
calls  Himself  so :  ''Ye  seek  to  kill  Me,  a  Man  (avOpti)- 
TTov)  that  hath  told  you  the  truth  "  (S.  John  viii.  40). 
S.  Paul  calls  Him  so,  singling  Him  out  from  other 
men;  ''the  grace  of  the  one  Man  (dvOpwrrov),  Jesus 
Christ"  (Rom.  v.  15).  Using  a  still  more  significant 
word,  S.  Peter  speaks  of  Him  as  "a  Man  (avdpa) 
approved  of  God"  (Acts  ii.  22),  and  S.  Paul  as  "a 
Man  (avdpi)  whom  God  ordained"  to  judge  the  world 
by  (Acts  xvii.  31). 

Such  language  sets  vividly  before  us  the  personal 
fulness  of  that  human  life  which  was  lived  on  earth 
and  is  still  being  lived  in  heaven;  and  all  that  we 
need  is  to  remember  that  that  "  Man  "  is  none  other 
than  the  Everlasting  Son  Himself.  Men  saw  a  per- 
sonal human  being,  and  not  merely  an  impersonal 
nature,  when  they  saw  Jesus;  but  it  was  because 
they  saw  the  Word  Himself  in  flesh.  Within  what 
met  their  gaze  there  were  not  two  persons  residing, 


138    No  Conversion  of  Godhead  into  Flesh. 


who  could  hold  dialogue  with  each  other.  They  be- 
held an  absolute  and  indivisible  unity;  and  it  was 
the  same  Person  who  spoke,  whether  He  said,  "  Be- 
fore Abraham  was,  I  am,"  or  whether  He  said,  I 
thirst." 

§  7. 

The  manner  o£  this  personal  union  lies  beyond 
our  comprehension,  and  we  are  not  at  liberty  to  make 
it  suit  our  intelligence  by  anything  which  alters  the 
character  o£  either  nature.  Of  such  false  methods 
perhaps  the  most  elementary  would  be  that  con- 
demned in  the  Qiiiciimqive  vult,  by  the  words,  "  One, 
not  by  conversion  of  the  Godhead  into  flesh,  but  by 
taking  of  the  manhood  into  God."  The  Word,  when 
He  became  Man,  did  not  turn  Himself  into  a  man.  He 
did  not  exchange  one  nature  for  another,  or  cease  to 
be  what  He  was  before.  We  may  not  thus  secure  the 
unity  and  continuity  of  His  Person  at  the  expense  of 
His  Divine  nature.  Were  such  a  thing  possible, 
although  it  might  prove  the  kindness  and  self-sacri- 
ficing pity  of  the  Son  of  God,  it  would  destroy  all  the 
hopes  which  the  Catholic  faith  brings  us.  The  "  con- 
version of  the  Godhead  into  flesh  "  would  but  have 
added  one  more  man  to  the  number  of  men — a  sin- 
less one,  perhaps,  among  sinners,  but  it  would  have 
effected  no  union  of  God  and  men.  The  human 
nature  would  not  have  been  appropriated  by  God,  nor 
the  Divine  nature  communicated  to  men.  If  the  Son 
abdicated  His  Deity  to  assume  humanity,  He  did  but 
lower  Himself,  without  raising  what  He  came  to  help. 


Error  of  Monophysitism.  139 


But  the  very  idea  is  inconceivable.  The  fantastic 
language  of  a  myth  or  a  fairy  tale  can  speak  of  turn- 
ing one  thing  into  another,  but  thought  refuses  to 
folloAv  the  process.  No  continuity  could  be  preserved 
through  such  a  change  as  that  which  would  turn 
Daphne  into  a  bay  tree.  It  would  simply  mean  the 
cessation  of  the  one  existence,  and  the  substitution  of 
another  altogether.  And  if  we  tried  to  imagine  the 
cessation  of  the  Son  of  God,  and  the  substitution  for 
Him  of  a  human  being  bearing  His  name,  we  should 
find  ourselves  reduced  to  a  direct  absurdity.  Such  a 
theory  has  never  found  a  champion. 

§a 

A  more  specious  appearance  is  presented  by 
another  false  theory  which  the  Athanasian  symbol 
proceeds  to  reject.  One,  not  by  confusion  of  sub- 
stance," it  says,  ''but  by  unity  of  person."  There 
have  been,  and  still  are,  large  numbers  of  Christians 
who,  more  or  less  consciously,  and  with  considerable 
differences  among  themselves,  occupy  this  heretical 
position.  It  is  known  as  Monophysitism.  For  many 
hundred  years  it  has  been  the  recognised  creed  of 
several  ancient  Churches.  In  its  coarsest  form  it 
would  teach  that  the  two  natures  of  which  the  Christ 
is  composed,  though  originally  distinct,  have  so  run 
into  each  other  as  to  be  indistinguishable.  They 
not  only  permeate  and  interpenetr-ate  each  other  at 
every  point:  they  are  fused  and  blent  into  one.  It 
does  not  suffice  to  say  that  Christ  is  one  person ;  you 
must  say  that  He  has  but  one  nature.    You  must 


140  Error  of  Eutychianism. 

attribute  both  His  glories  and  His  limitations  indis- 
criminately to  the  new  whole  developed  by  the 
Incarnation. 

The  Monophysite  theory  is  an  improvement  upon 
that  o£  the  conversion  into  flesh,  inasmuch  as  it 
recognises  the  action  o£  both  elements  in  Christ ;  but 
it,  too,  destroys  the  true  conception  o£  an  Incarnation. 
The  fusion  o£  the  two  natures,  had  it  been  possible, 
would  have  produced  a  tert  mm  quid  which  would  be 
neither  God  nor  man.  Thus,  no  less  than  the  theory 
last  considered,  it  would  involve  a  turning  "  of  one 
thing  into  a.nother ;  only  it  would  repeat  the  absurdity 
twice  over.  It  would  necessitate  turning,  not  the 
Godhead  only,  but  the  manhood  also,  into  something 
foreign — into  some  nameless  nature,  betwixt  and  be- 
tween, the  fabulous  nature  of  a  semi-human  demigod. 

§  9- 

The  most  frequent  form  of  Monopliysitism,  how- 
ever, is  that  which  is  known  by  the  name  of  its 
exponent  Eutyches.  In  our  remarks  upon  it  we  do 
not  confine  ourselves  to  the  language  employed  by 
Eutyches  himself,  but  deal  with  the  tendency  which 
he  represents.  It  differs  from  that  which  has  just 
been  described  by  virtually  making  nothing  of  our 
Lord's  humanity.  It  may  be  called  the  opposite  of 
the  doctrine  which  turns  the  Godhead  into  flesh,  for 
it  practically  turns  the  flesh  into  Godhead.  Accord- 
ing to  this  view,  when  the  two  natures  become 
united  in  the  Person  of  the  Incarnate  Lord,  the 
limited  creaturely  nature  nmst,  to  all  intents  and 


It  makes  the  Manhood  tmreaL  141 


purposes,  disappear  amidst  the  glories  of  the  infinite 
nature  to  which  it  is  joined.  It  becomes  absorbed  and 
lost.  As  a  drop  of  vinegar  is  swallowed  up  in  the  sea, 
so  the  humanity  of  Christ  is  swallowed  up  in  His 
Divinity.    The  illustration  is  an  ancient  one. 

Such  a  doctrine  practically  reduces  the  historical 
life  of  Christ  to  an  unreality.  It  offers  little  more 
than  the  earlier  Docetism,  which  boldly  maintained 
that  the  body  of  our  Lord  was  a  hallucination. 
Eutychianism  would  give  it  as  much  reality  as  would 
fulfil  the  false  though  splendid  image  of  Shelley — 

A  mortal  shape  to  Him 
Was  as  the  vapour  dim, 
Which  the  orient  planet  animates  with  light." 

It  would  agree  with  that  poet  in  making  Him  tread 
the  thorns  of  death  and  shame  ''like  a  triumphal 
path/'  of  which  He  never  truly  felt  the  sharpness.  The 
development  of  His  human  nature,  according  to  Euty- 
chian  views,  could  only  take  place  in  appearance  and 
externally ;  there  could  be  no  expansion  and  progress 
which  He  could  observe  within  Himself.  If  it  could 
be  said  that  His  human  soul  was  at  any  time  ignorant 
of  any  fact,  such  ignorance  was  altogether  impercep- 
tible amidst  the  omniscience  of  His  Godhead.  To 
speak  of  Him  as  having  been  unable  to  do  this  or 
that  would  shock  the  Eutychian  tendency  of  mind,  as 
seeming  to  derogate  from  the  truth  of  His  Deity. 

Thus  it  comes  to  pass  that  the  sense  of  His  being 
(in  the  language  of  Chalcedon)  ''  consubstantial  with 
us  according  to  His  manhood,''  and  really  like  to  us 
in  all  things  but  sin,  becomes  obscured.  Divine 


142    ElUychianism  ends  in  Creatnre-worship, 


attributes  are  bestowed,  not  upon  Him,  but  upon  His 
sacred  humanity.  It  is  made,  for  instance,  to  be 
ubiquitous.  Attention  is  concentrated  upon  it,  as 
distinct  from  the  Divine  nature  which  is  joined  with 
it,  and  then  Divine  honours  are  paid  to  it.  That  the 
humanity  of  Christ  is  indeed  a  fitting  object  of  adora- 
tion is  recognised  by  all  Catholics,  but  not  His  hu- 
manity by  itself.  The  Eutychian  tendencj^,  which 
draws  the  mind's  eye  away  from  the  Divine  Person, 
to  fix  it  upon  the  human  nature,  or  even  upon  the 
material  elements,  which  that  Divine  Person  has 
assumed,  and  w^orships  what  it  thus  contemplates, 
ends  in  an  idolatry,  or  creature-worship.  Unguarded 
modes  of  adoring  the  Blessed  Sacrament  of  the  Altar ; 
the  cultus — not  harmless  because  symbolical — of  a 
special  portion  or  aspect  of  the  creaturely  nature,  like 
the  Sacred  Heart ;  are  an  outcome  of  this  wrong  deifi- 
cation of  our  Lord's  humanity. 

And  then,  by  a  curious  though  natural  counter- 
move,  that  habit  of  mind  which  begins  by  losing  sight 
of  the  true  manhood  in  the  Godhead,  follows  on  to 
lose  the  true  Godhead  in  the  manhood.  An  example 
may  be  found  in  the  extravagant  use  of  the  title — 
quite  correct  in  itself — of  "  Mother  of  God,"  which  is 
heard  in  some  quarters,  as  if  the  Eternal  Godhead 
itself  owed  its  origin,  and  consequently  its  obedience, 
to  Mary.  The  same  tendency  is  observable  in  the  use 
of  language  which  implies  that  the  Deity  in  Christ 
was  mortal.  In  hymns  and  other  devotions  there  is  a 
fondness  for  such  phrases  as  "  the  dying  God."  People 
speak  of  the  piercing  of  God's  hands,  the  marring  of 


and  in  the  Degradation  of  Deity.  143 


God  s  face,  and  the  like.^  Many  of  those  who  speak 
in  such  terms  are  well-instructed  persons,  who  do  not 
themselves  suppose  the  Divine  nature  in  Christ  to 
have  been  merged  in  the  human,  or  vice  versa,  and  are 
only  led  on  by  a  love  of  paradox.  But  the  love  of 
paradox  needs  to  be  narrowly  watched.  The  ignorant, 
and  still  more  the  half-taught,  are  apt  to  be  misled 
by  what  they  hear ;  and  the  result  of  feeding  much 
upon  these  paradoxes  is  that  men  lose  on  the  one  side 
the  solace  and  strength  which  comes  from  a  right 
conception  of  Christ's  humanity,  and  are  driven  into 
seeking  from  His  blessed  Mother  or  elsewhere  a 
sympathy  which  they  dare  not  claim  from  Him  ;  and, 
on  the  other  side,  with  the  inconsistency  which  has 
been  observed  before,  they  fall  into  sentimental, 
sensuous,  fondling,  modes  of  addressing  our  adorable 
Lord,  which  both  dishonour  Him  and  enfeeble  the 
soul  of  the  worshipper. 

'  An  isolated  expression  in  Holy  Scripture  is,  indeed,  quoted  in  sup- 
port of  such  language,  where  S.  Paul — if  the  text  be  correct — speaks  of 
"  the  Church  of  God,  which  He  purchased  with  His  own  Blood  "  (Acts 
XX.  28).  But  there  is  considerable  doubt  about  the  original  text.  It 
seems  not  improbable  that  the  author  wrote,  "  with  the  Blood  of  His 
own  Son."  If  we  take  the  text  as  it  stands,  it  must  be  observed  that, 
according  to  all  New  Testament  analogy,  "  the  Church  of  God  (roG 
@€ov)  "  must  mean  the  Church  of  God  the  Father ;  so  that  any  attempt  to 
connect  the  words  in  such  a  manner  as  would  suit  an  Eutychian  view, 
would  be  found  really  to  lead  further,  and  to  end  in  Patripassianism. 
But  the  words,  "His  own,"  stand  in  so  emphatic  a  position  in  the 
Greek  that  we  might  well  render,  "  which  He  purchased  with  the 
Blood  which  is  His  own."  Such  a  turn  at  once  suggests  that  it  is 
"  His  own  "  in  a  sense  different  from  the  usual  sense ;  as,  for  instance, 
because  of  the  essential  unity  between  Himself  and  the  Son  whose 
Blood  it  is.  Even  if  we  could  understand  the  Son  Himself  to  be 
intended  by  the  word  "God,"  the  very  emphasis  laid  on  the  words 
"His  own  "  would  preclude  an  Eutychian  interpretation, 


144    The  Nahtres  truly  tinited  in  one  Person. 


In  order  to  approach  Him  aright,  and  to  gain  from 
the  approach  what  He  desires  to  bestow,  it  is  as 
necessary  to  be  clear  from  all  confusion  of  the  two 
natures,  as  to  reject  all  separation  into  two  persons. 
The  Godhead  is  real,  and  the  manhood  is  real,  as 
neither  could  be,  if  they  were  in  any  way  mixed  and 
compounded.  The  Godhead  is  as  pure  and  un- 
adulterated as  the  Godhead  of  the  Father ;  the  man- 
hood is  as  simple  and  as  creaturely  as  in  her  from 
whom  He  took  it,  or  as  in  us.  The  union  between 
the  two  natures  is  indeed  a  union,  and  not  a  mere 
juxtaposition  of  two  disconnected  things;  but  the 
union  is  found  in  the  oneness  of  Christ's  Person,  and 
not  in  any  physical  combination,  nor  yet  in  any 
metaphysical  transubstantiation  of  either  essence  into 
the  other.  Our  own  constitution  again  supplies  us 
with  an  illustre.tion.  Spirit  and  body  in  us  are  not 
merely  put  side  by  side,  and  insulated  from  each 
other.  In  a  great  variety  of  ways  they  affect  and  are 
affected  by  each  other.  But  each  retains  its  own 
proper  nature.  An  attack  of  rheumatism  in  a  man's 
shoulder  has  an  influence  upon  his  spiritual  condition, 
but  it  would  be  absurd  to  speak  of  his  spirit  as 
liavino:  the  rheumatism.  And  the  communino^  of  a 
man's  spirit  with  God  makes  demands  upon  his  body, 
forcing  it  to  be  wakeful,  to  assume  a  reverent  attitude 
to  weep,  and  the  like ;  but  it  is  not  his  body  which 
thus  communes  with  God.  Tlie  reason  wliy  they 
affect  each  other  is  because  they  are  both  equally  Ids 
not  because  of  any  confusion  between  themselves. 

In  something  of  the  same  way  we  may  say  it  is 


The    Communicatio  IdiomahLm!'  145 


with  Christ.  Mary  is  rightly  called  Theotolws,  because 
her  Child  was,  "  from  the  birth,  and  from  the  womb, 
and  from  the  conception,''  very  God ;  but  she  was  not 
the  mother  of  His  Godhead.  We  may  legitimately 
speak  of  the  Blood  of  God  the  Son,  but  it  is  not  as 
God  that  He  has  blood — it  is  the  Blood  of  One  who  is 
God,  but  the  blood  belongs  to  His  human  nature  and 
not  to  the  Divine.  And  again,  it  is  true  that  Jesus 
Christ  came  down  from  heaven,  but  He  was  not  Jesus 
Christ  before  He  came  down, — that  is  to  say.  He  had 
no  human  nature  before  His  Incarnation.  To  say 
that  those  hands  which  were  tied  with  swaddling- 
clothes  were  the  same  which  made  the  stars  on  high 
may  be  passed  over  in  poetry  among  those  who 
understand;  but  it  is  not  true,  except  in  the  sense 
that  He  whose  hands  they  are  was  the  Agent  in 
creation.  His  human  nature  had  no  part  in  that 
work ;  it  was  as  God  alone  that  He  did  it.  The 
Person  is  absolutely  the  same ;  but  the  natures  retain 
their  own  properties.  There  is  a  real  and  vital  union 
between  them*  but  it  is  because  both  are  His,  the 
one  as  much  as  the  other.  "Of  both  natures,"  says 
Hooker,  "  there  is  a  co-operation  often,  an  association 
always,  but  never  any  mutual  participation  whereby 
the  properties  of  the  one  are  infused  into  the  other." 

§10. 

We  believe,  then,  that  in  the  Incailiation  the  two 
natures  were  perfectly  and  inseparably  joined  in  the 
one  Person  of  the  Word,  not  by  conversion  of  the  God- 
head into  flesh,  nor  by  the  conversion  of  the  flesh  into 

L 


146  Christ^ s  Godhead  perfect. 


CocUiead,  nor  yet  by  tlie  conversion  of  botli  into  an 
intermediate  compound.  It  remains  to  be  pointed 
out  tliat  tlic  two  natures  thus  united  are  not  only 
true,  but  complete.  It  is  difficult  to  say  what  con- 
stitutes our  idea  of  the  completeness  of  Deity.  God 
cannot  be  l)roken  up  or  divided.  Such  a  thing  as 
a  mutilated  or  diminished  Godhead  is  an  impossible 
conception.  If  there  was  Godhead  at  all,  it  was  full 
and  perfect  Godhead.  And  the  human  nature  which 
our  Lord  assumed  was  likewise  a  complete  human 
nature.  This  is  a  matter  more  easily  tested.  If  the 
component  elements  of  man  are  spirit,  soul,  and  body, 
these  are  all  found  in  Christ  ;  and  the  mutual  rela- 
tions of  the  three  are  the  same  in  Him  as  in  us, 
except  where  sin,  in  our  case,  has  deranged  the 
normal  connexion. 

^  He  had — He  has — a  ))ody.  It  gathered  shape, 
like  ours,  from  the  maternal  substance.  It  grew ;  it 
-walked;  it  ate  and  drank,  and  needed  to  be  sus- 
tained by  eating  and  drinking.  It  hungered  and 
thirsted ;  it  was  weary  and  slept ;  it  sweated ;  it  bled ; 
it  died.  Before  it  rose  transformed  from  the  dead, 
men  saw  it,  gazed  upon  it,  handled  it,  struck  it, 
embalmed  and  buried  it.  They  found  it  to  be  a  solid 
material  thing,  subject  to  the  same  laws  as  ours. 
Though,  on  occasion,  things  w^hich  most  of  us  cannot 
do  with  our  bodies  were  done  by  it,  yet  His  Body 
itself  was  not  on  that  account  different  from  ours ;  and 
if  our  Lord  walked  on  the  water  of  the  lake,  so  did 
S.  Peter  when  our  Lord  bade  him. 

And  to  our  Lord  s  body  w^as  joined  a  spiiit.  It 


Christ's  Manhood  perfect.  147 


was  the  organ  by  which  He  prayed  to  His  God  and 
Father.  In  it  He  took  deep  note  of  spiritual  facts : 
''Jesus  knew  in  His  spirit"  (S.  Mark  ii.  8).  In  it 
He  rejoiced  and  sorrowed:  ''In  that  hour  Jesus 
rejoiced  in  spirit  "  (S.  Luke  x.  21)  ;  "  He  was  troubled 
in  spirit  and  testified''  (S.  John  xiii.  21).  In  it  He 
felt  the  emotion  of  a  moral  indication : — "  He  siofhed 
deeply  in  His  spirit''  (S.  Mark  viii.  12)  :  "  He  groaned 
in  the  spirit"  (S.  John  xi.  33).  It  was  the  seat  of 
His  inmost  human  self-knowledge  :  He  "  was  justified 
in  the  spirit  "  (1  Tim.  iii.  16).  It  was  the  last  retreat 
of  His  human  life  :  "  Father,  into  Thy  hands  I  com- 
mend My  spirit"  (S.  Luke  xxiii.  46);  "In  which 
also  He  went  and  preached  unto  the  spirits  in  prison  " 
(1  Pet.  iii.  19). 

And  He  had  a  soul.  "  My  soul/'  says  Christ,  "  is 
exceeding  sorrowful,  even  unto  death  "  (S.  Matt.  xxvi. 
38).  The  heresy  of  ApoUinaris  consisted  in  a  well- 
meant  attempt  to  explain  the  unity  of  Christ's  Person 
by  teaching  that  His  humanity  had  no  rational  soul, 
but  only  the  animal  soul,  and  that  the  Eternal  Word 
supplied  its  place.  The  Gospels  are  against  that 
mode  of  getting  rid  of  the  mystery.  Loosely  as 
the  word  "soul"  is  sometimes  used  in  the  New 
Testament,  it  cannot  be  doubted  that  Christ  had 
and  has  a  rational  soul  entirely  like  ours — except 
that  His  is  perfect,  and  ours  are  not — when  we  regard 
the  faculties  of  which  He  stood  possessed.  He  mar- 
velled ;  He  learned.  What  once  He  had  perceived, 
He  thenceforth  knew.  He  had  no  opinions,  no 
conjectures;  we  are  never  told  that  He  forgot,  nor 


148    His  rational  Soul  and  human  Will 


even  that  He  remembered,  which  would  imply  a 
degree  of  forgetting ;  we  are  not  expressly  told  of 
His  arriving  at  truths  by  the  process  of  reasoning 
them  out;  but  He  reasons  them  out  for  others.  It 
is  not  recorded  that  He  took  counsel,  or  formed  plans ; 
but  He  desired,  and  He  purposed,  and  He  did  one 
thing  with  a  view  to  another. 

This  intelligent  aim  necessitates  also  a  genuine 
human  will.  The  Monotheletes,  who  suppose  that 
there  is  but  one  will  in  Christ — the  will  which  belongs 
to  Him  as  Son  of  God — ought  logically  to  go  further, 
and  adopt  the  whole  ApoUinarian  view,  and  deny  the 
rational  soul.  For  where  there  is  intelligent  percep- 
tion and  free  reflexion  there  cannot  fail  to  be  moral 
choice.  Moral  choice  is  the  direct  outcome  of  intelU- 
gent  reflexion ;  and  will  is  the  faculty  for  making 
a  series  of  acts  of  moral  choice,  self-determined  by 
rational  reflexion.  If,  therefore,  there  was  but  one 
will  in  Christ,  and  that  the  Divine  will,  it  could 
be  guided  only  by  His  Divine  knowledge,  and  the 
human  perceptions  had  no  share  in  its  direction.  If 
that  were  the  case,  for  all  moral  purposes  Christ's 
humanity  was  as  good  as  worthless,  and  His  rational 
soul  lacked  that  which  is  its  true  end  and  object.  We 
are,  therefore,  forced  to  believe,  in  spite  of  difficulties 
upon  which  we  must  toucli  afterwards,  that  Christ's 
human  nature  was  possessed  of  active  free-will  like 
our  own — except  in  being  truly  free,  while  ours  is 
partially  enslaved.  In  conforming  this  human  will 
always  to  the  Divine,  lay  the  glory  of  His  human  self- 
sacrifice.    When  He  says,  ''I  came  not  to  do  Mine 


Tivo  Wills  in  Christ. 


149 


own  will,  but  the  will  o£  Him  that  sent  Me  "  (S.  John 
vi.  38),  or,  ^'Not  My  will,  but  Thine  be  done" 
(S.  Luke  xxii.  42),  we  may  not,  indeed,  exclude  the 
thought  that  the  Son  in  His  Divine  nature  is  in  perfect 
accord  with  the  Father,  but  the  phrases  would  have 
little  meaning  if  He  who  uttered  them  were  not 
supremely  conscious  of  making  a  free  creaturely 
choice. 

But  while  both  natures  in  Christ  are  perfect,  and 
unimpaired  by  contact  with  each  other,  they  are  not 
unaffected  by  their  union.  It  does  not  quite  satisfy 
the  mind  to  be  told  that  the  unity  of  Christ's 
Person  is  the  key  to  the  mystery  of  the  Incarnation. 
For,  in  the  first  place,  it  would  create  a  false  impres- 
sion if  we  made  men  think  that  the  Person  of  the 
Word  was  incarnate,  but  not  His  Nature ;  whereas, 
indeed,  the  whole  point  of  the  great  transaction  is 
that  it  was  the  Incarnation  of  the  Godhead — the 
taking  of  the  manhood  into  God,  and  the  im^partition 
of  the  Godhead  to  man.  And,  in  the  second  place,  we 
may  rightly  ask — Was  it  really  'possihle  for  the  same 
Person  to  be  at  once  both  God  and  man  ?  Hov/  could 
the  two  forms  of  consciousness  exist  side  by  side  in 
the  same  subject  ? 

This  is  the  point  v/here  faith  has  least  to  aid  it. 
We  can  do  little  more  than  revere,  and  wait  in  silence 
for  the  fuller  light  that  is  to  come.  To  be  sure  that 
Christ  is  perfect  God  and  perfect  Man  is  the  great 
thing ;  and  this  assurance  we  have.    If  we  try  to  in- 


1 50  Human  Nature  akin  to  the  Divine. 


vestigate  further  the  mutual  relations  between  the 
two  natures,  it  must  be  in  no  curious  idleness,  but  to 
deepen  our  adoring  gratitude. 

But  while  much  is  dark  to  us,  the  main  things 
which  we  know  about  man  and  God  in  some  measure 
mitigate  the  difficulty.  As  has  been  stated  before, 
the  natures  of  God  and  man  are  not  contradictory 
of  each  other,  as  life  and  death  are,  or  holiness  and 
sin.  To  conceive  of  a  union  between  such  mutually 
exclusive  terms  as  those  is  impossible,  but  not  be- 
tween God  and  man.  The  question  was  at  one  time 
frequently  debated  whether,  if  it  had  pleased  Him, 
God  could  have  become  an  angel,  or  a  stone,  or  a 
vegetable,  instead  of  man.  The  answer  cannot  be 
doubtful.  Whatever  may  be  in  the  abstract  the 
power  of  God,  He  could  not  will  to  do  such  a  thing, 
and  it  would  not  be  possible  for  the  nature  of  the 
vegetable  or  the  stone,  or  even  for  that  of  an  angel, 
to  receive  Him.  There  is  no  such  affinity  between 
Him  and  them  as  to  prepare  the  way  for  any  direct 
union  with  Him  other  than  that  which  they  already 
have.  Only  through  man,  the  high  priest  and 
mediator  of  creation,  can  the  rest  of  creation  become 
partaker  of  God.  It  would  be  false  to  say,  as  some 
ancient  thinkers  did,  that  Deity  and  humanity  are,  at 
bottom,  the  same  thing ;  for  in  that  case  there  would 
be  no  true  Incarnation  after  all, — the  Godhead  would 
merely  have  assumed,  in  the  birth  of  Christ,  one 
fashion  of  its  own  being.  But  it  is  true  to  say  that 
humanity  has  not  attained  its  perfection,  and  is  like 
an  eye  without  the  light,  until  it  is  crowned  and  ful- 


Gradtial  Expansion  of  Chris  fs  Manhood.    1 5 1 


filled  by  the  Incarnation.  It  is  not  Deity  itself ;  but 
it  is  a  germ  which,  by  correspondence  with  God's  grace, 
can  grow  up  into  being  a  true  complement  or  counter- 
part  to  Deity. 

Thus  there  is  nothing  which  outrages  our  reason 
in  the  thought  o£  a  human  nature  being  personally 
united  with  the  Divine  and  assimilated  to  it.  It  does 
not  destroy  its  humanity.  Our  bodies,  even  in  this 
life,  are  brought  by  discipline  under  the  dominion  of 
the  spirit  to  such  an  extent  that  we  are  not  surprised 
to  learn  what  is  their  destiny  hereafter.  They  are  to 
become  spiritual  bodies — bodies,  that  is,  with  cha- 
racteristics of  the  spirit  imparted  to  them ;  but  they 
do  not  for  that  reason  become  spirits,  and  cease  to 
be  bodies.  So  we  may  believe  the  human  nature  to 
be  capable  of  such  subservience  to  the  Divine  as  to  re- 
ceive many  powers  which  were  quite  beyond  itself  to 
develope,  and  yet  to  remain  true  human  nature  from 
the  first  stage  to  the  last,  never  parting  with  any  one 
of  the  distinctive  features  of  manhood,  yet  receiving 
a  progressive  conformation  to  the  Divine.  This  was 
what  took  place  in  Christ.  His  human  nature  began 
at  the  beginning,  and  from  the  very  beginning  it  was 
the  organ  of  the  Divine.  As  growth  is  human,  it 
grew.  "Jesus  increased  in  wisdom  and  stature,  and 
in  favour  with  God  and  man  "  (S.  Luke  ii.  52).  One 
faculty  after  another,  in  due  order,  awoke,  and  exerted 
itself,  and  throve,  and  gained  strength.  First  came 
what  seems  the  purely  animal  life  of  infancy;  and 
then  the  dawning  and  expanding  reason ;  and  then 
the  conscious  spiritual  life  which  says,  "  Wist  ye  not 


152    The  Divine  Nature  made    bearable  J' 


that  I  must  be  in  My  Father  s  house  ? (S.  Luke  ii. 
49).  And  so  the  progress  went  on,  physical,  intel- 
lectual, moral,  spiritual,  up  to  the  Transfiguration, 
and  so  to  death  and  through  death  to  resurrection, 
and  from  resurrection  to  ascension, — the  whole  har- 
monious human  constitution  appropriating  more  and 
more  fully  the  Nature  which  dwelt  in  it,  and  be- 
coming a  more  and  more  adequate  vehicle  for  the 
Divine,  yet  never,  even  on  the  throne  of  heaven, 
ceasing  to  be  purely  human,  entirely  "  consubstantial 
with  us/' 

§  12. 

It  is,  however,  comparatively  easy  to  imagine  how 
the  human  nature  could  lend  itself  to  receive  the 
Divine.  "  The  very  cause,"  says  Hooker,  "  of  His 
taking  upon  Him  our  nature  was  to  change  it,  to 
better  the  quality,  and  to  advance  the  condition 
thereof,  although  in  no  sort  to  abolish  the  substance 
which  He  took,  nor  to  infuse  into  it  the  natural  forces 
and  properties  of  His  Deity.'*'  Far  harder  it  is  to 
reach  any  intellectual  notion  of  the  effect  of  the 
union  upon  His  Divine  nature.  How  was  it  accom- 
modated to  the  conditions  in  whicli  it  appeared  on 
earth  ?  How  was  it  made — to  use  a  favourite  word 
of  S.  Cyril's — bearable  "  to  the  inferior  nature  wliich 
it  assumed  ?  Perhaps,  if  the  nature  which  it  assumed 
liad  been  from  tlie  first  in  the  full  glory  of  its  present 
heavenly  maturity,  the  wonder  would  not  have  seemed 
so  great ;  but  how  could  the  Son  of  (iod  become  an 
embryo,  a  babe,  a  dying  and  a  dead  man  ? 


Self -emptying  of  the  Son  of  God.  153 


One  •  great  saying  of  S. » Paul's  flashes  upon  the 
subject  all  the  light  which  in  this  life  we  are  likely  to 
obtain.  Exhorting  the  Philippians  not  to  stand  upon 
their  rights,  but  voluntarily,  for  love's  sake,  to  give 
them  up  to  one  another  as  not  worth  a  contest,  he 
adduces  the  example  of  "  Christ  Jesus ;  who,  being 
originally  in  the  form  of  God,  deemed  it  not  a  prize  to 
be  clutched  at  to  be  "  as  He  then  was  "  on  an  equality 
with  God,  but "  by  His  own  act  "  emptied  Himself, 
taking  the  form  of  a  bondman,  coming  to  be  in  the 
likeness  of  men  "  (Phil.  ii.  6,  7).  Eound  this  central 
statement  gather  others  of  a  less  explicit  nature. 
What  infinite  suggestiveness  lies  in  the  reserve  of 
those  similar  words  to  the  Corinthians :  Ye  know 
the  grace  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  that  for  your 
sakes  He  became  poor,  rich  though  He  was,  that  ye 
by  His  poverty  might  be  rich  "  (2  Cor.  viii.  9) !  The 
Hebrews  are  told  that  He  was  "  made  a  little  " — or, 
"  for  a  little  while  " — "  lower  than  the  angels  ''  (Heb. 
ii.  9).  More  faintly  still,  the  same  thought  is  con- 
stantly implied  wherever,  instead  of  saying  that  our 
Lord  "  came,"  or  "  came  into  the  world,''  we  are  told 
that  He  "  came  down  "  {e.g.  S.  John  vi.  38 ;  Eph.  iv. 
9).  The  mystery  comes  in  sight  again  when  our  Lord, 
in  His  last  prayer,  prays  for  the  restitution  of  His 
original  glory  as  of  a  thing  of  which  He  had  for 
a  time  been  dispossessed :  Now  glorify  Thou  Me, 
Father,  with  Thyself,  with  the  glory  which  I  had, 
before  the  world  was,  with  Thee  "  (S.  John  xvii.  5). 

Perhaps  the  significance  of  tliese  profound  words 
has  as  yet  Imrdly  been  so  tlioroughlj^  explored  in  the 


1 54  Necessity  of  this  Doctrine. 


Church  as  it  might  be,  and  the  doctrine  which  they 
contain  may  be  among  the  things  which  have  yet  to 
be  worked  out.  Elaborate  systems  of  Divinity  are  to 
be  found  which  pass  them  over  without  examination. 
We  cannot,  indeed,  hope  at  present  to  penetrate  deep 
into  the  mystery,  because  the  conditions  of  the  Divine 
consciousness  lie  so  far  beyond  our  apprehension  ;  but 
it  is  possible  that  a  more  firm  grasp  of  what  has  been 
revealed  on  the  subject  may  help  to  dispel  some  con- 
fusions. Certainly  any  refusal  to  believe  in  the 
self-emptying  of  the  Eternal  Son,  any  attempt  to 
minimise  it  and  explain  it  away,  seems  to  impair  the 
completeness  of  the  Incarnation.  Without  it,  our 
Lord's  earthly  life  assumes  to  us  an  aspect  of  un- 
reality. If  we  avoid  the  danger  of  falling  into  the 
Eutychian  error  of  attributing  Divine  omniscience 
to  the  human  intelligence  of  the  new-born  Child  of 
Mary,  we  are  apt  to  fall  into  the  opposite  error  of 
Nestorianism,  and  to  suppose  that  the  new-born 
Child,  with  Its  natural  human  ignorance,  was  not  as 
yet  really  and  truly  the  Word  Himself,  but  only 
mysteriously  annexed  to  the  Word,  while  the  Word 
Himself  lived  on  somewhere  else,  outside,  so  to  speak, 
of  the  human  being  which  He  had  annexed :  which 
would  seem  to  reduce  the  earthly  career  of  Jesus  to 
an  illusion, — the  setting  in  motion  of  a  human-looking 
thing,  not  the  real  living  of  a  human  life. 

It  has  been  pointed  out  before,  and  it  must  be 
borne  in  mind  in  all  theological  investigations,  that 
we  Avho  live  in  time  are  not  capable  of  understanding 
the  relations  between  time  and  eternity.    We  cannot, 


Mystery  of  the  Condescension.  155 


therefore,  say  what  may  be  the  aspect  of  the  temporal 
humiliation  of  the  Son,  contemplated  from  the  point  of 
view  of  His  absolute  eternity,  any  more  than  M^e  can 
say  what  may  be  the  aspect  of  the  whole  history  of 
creation,  of  which  it  forms  a  part.  The  purely  Divine 
side  of  the  matter  is  incomprehensible  to  us.  What 
abiding  facts  in  the  Divine  life  underlie  those  things 
which  necessarily  appear  to  us  as  actions  on  God's  part, 
no  human  thought  can  ascertain.  But  our  not  under- 
standing another  side  of  things  must  not  be  allowed  to 
throw  doubt  upon  that  side  which  we  can  understand. 
We  are  not  afraid  to  affirm  that  it  was  an  event  in 
the  life  of  God,  when  He  spake  and  the  world  was 
created.  As  observed  by  us,  something  new  then 
took  place,  which  modified  the  conditions  in  which 
God  lives.  And  when,  again,  the  Redeemer  was  born 
at  Bethlehem,  it  does  not  concern  us  much  to  inquire 
about  the  supra-temporal  side  of  the  event,  but  we 
say  that,  as  observed,  and  truly  observed  by  us,  a  still 
greater  event  took  place  then  in  the  life  of  God,  by 
which  not  only  the  external  conditions  of  His  existence 
were  modified,  but  the  internal  also,  and  He  Himself, 
in  the  person  of  the  Son,  became  what  He  was  not 
before.  As,  by  creation.  He  accommodated  Himself 
to  coexist  with  finite  and  free  beings,  so,  in  the  In- 
carnation, the  Son  accommodated  Himself  to  experi- 
ence, in  His  own  person,  the  conditions  under  which 
we  free  but  finite  beings  live.  The  language  of  the 
Bible  does  not  set  before  us  the  life  of  Christ  as  being 
lived  simultaneously  upon  two  parallel  planes,  with  a 
continuous  and  unbroken  range  of  consciousness  pro- 


156        Reality  of  the  Condescension. 


ceeding  concurrently  upon  both.^  That  is  not  the 
true  notion  of  eternity.  It  cannot  be  regai^ded  as  a 
succession,  moving  simultaneously  with  temporal  suc- 
cession. When,  therefore,  we  are  following  the  life 
of  Christ  upon  earth,  we  need  not  perplex  our  minds 
with  the  notion  of  His  enjoying  at  the  same  time  a 
heavenly  life  of  equality  with  the  Father.  However 
an  eternal  being  might  describe  what  was  done,  it  seems 
as  if  we,  here  below,  must  understand  that  when  the 
Son  "  came  down  from  heaven,"  it  was  a  real  coming 
down ;  not  one  in  which  the  Son  merely  added  to  an 
unchangeable  Divine  consciousness  another,  humbler, 
human  consciousness,  but  a  coming  down  in  which 
the  Divine  Person  actually  gave  up  something  which 
He  possessed  before,  and  submitted  His  whole  self  to 
privation  and  limitation.  Instead  of  imagining  a 
Divine  life  of  Christ  lived  aloof  from  the  human,  it 
would  appear  truer  to  think  of  the  one  as  completely 
lodged  in  the  other,  and  conditioned  by  it.  He  left 
the  glory  which  He  eternally  had  with  the  Father, 
to  become  conscious,  in  time,  of  earthly  limitations. 

*  There  is,  perhaps,  but  one  passage  of  the  New  Testament  which 
seems  to  lend  any  direct  countenance  to  this  way  of  looking  at  things. 
In  the  Authorised  Version,  our  Lord  says  to  Nico'demus,  "  No  man  hath 
ascended  up  to  heaven,  but  He  that  came  down  from  heaven,  even  the 
Son  of  Man  wliicli  is  in  heaven  "  (S.  John  iii.  13).  The  paradox  liere 
seems  complete.  Ho  "  came  down  ;  "  yet  there  lie  "  is."  But  those 
wlio  have  the  best  riglit  to  speak  tell  us  that  the  last  clause  does  not 
stand  in  the  most  ancient  text  at  all.  If  it  is  an  integral  part  of  the 
Gospel,  it  might,  perhaps,  be  interpreted  to  mean  that  heaven,  although 
He  lias  left  it,  is  essentially  the  home  of  Ilim  who  is  now  Son  of  Man; 
or  even  that,  by  constant  fellowship  with  (Jod,  He  lives  upon  earth  an 
unenrthly  life,  conversant  with  heavenly  realities,  as  S.  Paul  teaches 
that  it  i,^  our  privih^ge  alf-o  to  do. 


Difictdty  of  tmder standing  it,        1 5  7 


This  belief  involves  many  mysteries  which  wc 
cannot  solve.  We  cannot  understand  how  it  was 
possible  for  the  Son  to  set  bounds  in  any  sense  to  His 
own  infinity,  or  to  suspend,  if  we  may  so  speak,  His  con- 
sciousness of  exercising  Divine  knowledge  and  power, 
in  order  to  enter  into  earthly  conditions.  We  cannot 
understand  how,  in  those  days  of  His  humiliation, 
the  Almighty  Word  was  still  carrying  on  that  work 
which  He  performs  in  nature  and  history,  and  how 
from  the  new-born  Babe  still  radiated  forth  (as 
assuredly  they  did)  those  influences  which  maintain 
the  unity  and  order  of  the  world.  We  cannot  under- 
stand how  the  essential  life  of  the  Blessed  Trinity  in 
heaven  was  affected  by  the  coming  down  of  the  Son 
into  the  created  order.  It  may  be  a  partial  answer 
to  one  of  these  difficulties  to  say  that  God  governs 
the  world,  not,  as  we  govern,  by  consecutive  exer- 
tions of  attention  and  force,  but  by  being  to  it  what 
He  is.  And  for  another  we  must  remember  that  the 
coming  down  of  the  Son  at  His  Incarnation  is  always 
spoken  of  in  Scripture  as  corresponding  to  a  self- 
sacrifice  on  the  part  of  the  Father,  who  "  gave Him. 
But  whatever  difficulties  remain  unsolved,  and  whether 
or  not  the  account  here  given  of  our  Lord's  humilia- 
tion be  the  true  one,  this,  at  least,  we  must  believe — 
that  the  little  Babe  which  lay  in  the  manger  of  Beth- 
lehem, with  Its  undeveloped  mind  and  spirit,  was  the 
Eternal  Son,  and  nothing  less.  It  was  the  personal 
Word  in  all  His  fulness  which  was  made  flesh ;  and 
the  Word  was  all  made  flesh  at  once.  He  Himself 
"tabernacled  among  us."   ''In  Him,"  says  S*  Paul, 


158    The  Self-emptying  a  Proof  of  Pozuer, 


''dwelleth  all  the  fulness  of  the  Godhead  in  bodily 
wise"  (Col.  ii.  9),  and  the  saying  holds  true  of  His 
earthly  sojourn  as  well  as  of  His  present  heavenly  state. 
What  men  saw  and  handled  during  His  three  and 
thirty  years  was  the  Word  Himself.  The  Word  Him- 
self became  subject  to  time  and  space,  to  growth  and 
change.  So  true  was  the  self -emptying  on  the  part  of 
the  Word  as  to  give  room  for  all  the  experiences  of  a 
sinless  humanity,  from  the  blind  life  before  birth  and 
onwards.  Deity  was  not  laid  aside ;  it  could  not  be  ; 
but  the  exercise  of  some  of  its  attributes  was,  while 
the  Word  moved  through  the  days  of  His  humiliation. 
The  glory  of  our  Lord's  redeeming  love  is  obscured  if 
we  lose  sight  of  this.  ''In  those  very  homely  facts 
and  phrases,"  says  an  ancient  Greek  writing  formerly 
assigned  to  S.  Athanasius,  "  lies  exactly  the  point  of 
Christianity." 

To  part  in  appearance  only  with  the  fruition  of 
Divine  prerogatives  would  be  to  impose  upon  us  with 
a  pretence  of  self-sacrifice ;  but  to  part  with  it  in 
reality  was  to  manifest  most  perfectly  the  true 
nature  of  God.  It  cannot  be  said  that  this  view 
presents  to  us  a  spectacle  of  mutilated  or  diminished 
Godhead,  such  as  we  have  stated  to  be  impossible. 
None  of  the  Divine  powers  were  lost  to  Christ  while 
He  was  upon  earth.  The  very  act  by  which  He  laid 
aside  the  enjoyment  of  His  omnipotence  was  a  proof 
that  He  was  omnipotent.  "  He  emptied  Himself."  It 
was  His  own  doing.  If  He  tlu'cw  Himself  into  the 
limitations  of  human  knowledge  and  of  human  poAver, 
it  was  because  He  chose  to  do  so ;  and  all  the  time  that 


It  makes  Room  to  reveal  Love,  159 


those  Divine  powers  were  (in  S.  Irenaeus'  phrase) 
quiescent "  within  Him,  they  still  were  His.  Had  He 
chosen  to  revoke  His  self-emptying,  there  was  nothing 
outside  Himself  to  hinder  Him.  The  weakness  of 
God/'  says  the  jipostle, is  stronger  than  men (1  Cor. 
i.  25) ;  and,  however  it  might  have  appeared  at  the 
moment,  on  looking  back,  at  leasts  the  self-suppression 
of  Christ  —  that  perfect  mastery  of  His  glorious 
attributes,  symbolized  in  the  prophetic  vision  by  the 
horns  coming  out  of  His  hand "  (Hab.  iii.  4),  and 
displayed  in  "  the  hiding  of  His  power — the  mighty 
powers,"  as  it  has  been  well  said,  "  held  under  a 
mighty  control " — this  is  the  greatest  of  His  miracles. 
It  was,  we  may  reverently  say,  the  only  way  to  show 
us  the  Father.  Men  are  too  ready  to  look  upon  God 
as  crushing  force  and  cold  omniscience.  Had  Christ 
appeared  on  earth  with  all  His  splendours  about  Him, 
He  would  have  perpetuated  our  mistake.  But  He 
took  another  way.  It  is  the  very  essence  of  the  Word 
to  be  the  Divine  expression  of  the  inmost  nature  of 
God.  The  inmost  nature  of  God  is  love.  And  when 
Christ  emptied  Himself  of  the  exercise  of  omnipotence 
and  infinite  knowledge.  He  did  not  empty  Himself  of 
love.  He  divested  Himself  only  of  that  which  would 
have  dazzled  and  distracted  us,  in  order  that  we  might 
see  His  love  more  perfectly.  The  self-sacrifice  of 
Bethlehem,  leading  on  to  that  of  Calvary,  leaves  no 
room  for  doubt.  The  Babe,  lying  in  the  manger,  is  the 
"sign"  (S.  Luke  ii.  12)  which  convinces  us  of  a  richer 
theology  than  w^e  could  have  guessed  at,  and  makes  us 
cry,  with  the  angels,    Glory  to  God  in  the  highest." 


Chapter  VI. 


Atoning  22Eloi1t  of  &\)xi^t. 

Christ  the  natural  Mediator  between  God  and  Man  by  reason  of  His 
eternal  Relations  7vith  Both — The  Incarnation  to  have  been  expected 
apart  Jrorn  Redemption — Redemption  possible  to  God  by  other  ineans 
— Redemption  7wt  the  only  benefit  of  the  Incarnation — Incarnation 
the  eternal  Purpose  of  God — Simplicity  of  Catholic  Doctrine  of 
Atonement — CJirist'^s  Life  reveals  to  men  the  Character  of  God — Its 
Meaning  made  e.xplicit  by  His  Words — The  Reconciliation  to  be 
effected  not  a  inutnal  Reconciliation — //  originates  with  the  Father 
Himself—Sympathy  of  the  Father  with  the  Sufferings  of  the  Son— 
The  Atonement  reveals  the  Divine  Hatred  of  Sin — Atoning  Value 
of  Christ'' s  Life  as  that  of  the  Representative  Man — Its  Sinks sness 
tested  by  Temptation — A  Life  of  perfect  Obedience — under  Suffering 
— and  Death — Unique  Character  of  ChrisCs  Death — His  Death 
regarded  as  a  Confession — Penal  Nature  of  the  Dereliction  on  the 
Cross — No  Substitution  of  Chj'ist  for  Sinners — Salvation  by  the 
Cross  itself  not  by  Iheories  concerning  it. 

%  1- 

Christ  is  the  Mediator  between  God  and  the  world  by 
no  arbitrary  act  of  selection.  He  is  the  Mediator  by 
nature,  and  the  only  complete  Mediator  who  can  be 
imagined.  This  arises  from  the  position  which  He 
eternally  occupies  in  relation  to  God  on  the  one  hand, 
and  to  man  on  the  other. 

The  Son  of  God  is,  as  we  have  seen,  the  absolute 
expression  of  tlic  wliole  being  and  character  of  God. 


Christ  the  A  rchetype  and  Son  of  Man,     1 6 1 


He  is — even  before  and  apart  from  creation — God  as 
revealed,  the  Light  as  streaming  forth  from  the  Source 
of  Lioiit.  Whatever  communication  can  be  made 
from  God  to  creation — angelic,  human,  or  inferior — 
must  needs  be  made  through  the  Son  of  God  ;  and 
whatever  approach  is  made  by  creation  towards  God 
must  needs  be  likewise  made  through  Him,  and 
cannot  be  made  otherwise.  This  mediation  of  the 
Son  is  as  necessary  for  sinless  as  for  sinful  creatures. 
When  Christ  says,  "  I  am  the  Way ;  no  one  cometh 
unto  the  Father  but  by  Me"  (S.  John  xiv.  6),  He 
expresses,  not  a  rule  of  privilege  and  of  conventional 
arrangement,  but  an  inherent  necessity  of  the  case. 

And  as  He  is  naturally  the  expression  of  God,  so 
is  He  naturally  the  Archetype  of  man,  who  is  made 
after  Him  as  his  pattern.  And  by  the  Incarnation  the 
Word  became  actually,  what  He  always  was  ideally,  the 
perfect  Man.  We  see  Him  as  "  the  Son  of  Man." 
This  title,  which  He  invented  and  chose  for  Himself, 
signifies  that  He  has,  by  actual  derivation  from  human 
parentage,  everything  that  is  characteristic  of  hu- 
manity, even  as,  by  actual  derivation  from  His  Father, 
He  has  everything  that  is  characteristic  of  Godhead. 
He  is  not  merely  a  man,  as  one  out  of  many  similars ; 
not  merely  man,  as  if  in  the  abstract,  and  disconnected 
from  the  rest  of  us ;  nor  the  son  of  a  man,  as  if  He 
obtained  His  humanity  from  some  partial  source  ;  nor 
a  son  of  man,  as  if  others  might  conceivably  hold  the 
same  sort  of  position  in  the  race.  He  is  the  Son  of 
Man,"  the  supreme  production  of  the  human  kind, 
into  whom  all  that  is  of  the  essence  of  manhood  is 

M 


1 62  Christ  the  Son  of  Man. 


fully  poured.  Though  living  under  true  historical 
conditions,  "  of  the  seed  of  David  "  (2  Tim.  ii.  8),  and 
educated  as  a  Jew,  He  yet  transcends  all  national 
peculiarities  and  all  the  peculiarities  of  His  age ;  and 
what  S.  Paul  says  of  the  mystical  body  of  Christ  is 
true  of  Christ's  own  life,  that  it  has  not  the  exclusive 
features  of  Jew  or  Greek,  barbarian  or  Scythian,  bond 
or  free,  nor  even  of  male  or  female  (Col.  iii.  11 ;  Gal. 
iii.  28).  He  is  the  perfect  type  of  them  all.  Not  even 
any  predominant  excellences  are  seen  in  Him :  He  is 
not  the  poet,  or  the  statesman,  or  the  man  of  science, 
or  the  artist ;  He  cannot  be  distinguished  by  the  pos- 
session of  the  active  or  the  passive  virtues.  He  is 
simply  man,  as  man.  It  was  His,  through  the  virgin 
birth,  to  gather  up  and  harmonize  whatever  true  con- 
stituent of  human  nature  is  found  in  fragments  in  us 
all,  and  so  to  be  the  fit  interpreter  of  the  best  side  of 
every  one  of  us.  Holding,  therefore,  as  He  does,  this 
twofold  relation,  as  the  Son  of  Man  and  the  Son  of 
God,  He  is  the  natural  Mediator  between  the  two, 
perfectly  representing  God  to  man,  and  perfectly 
representing  man  to  God. 

§  2. 

There  is  no  need  to  think  that  it  was  sin  which 
caused  the  Eternal  Son  to  become  man.  The  media- 
torial function  is  essentially  His,  and  it  seems  as  if  it 
could  never  have  been  thoroughly  fulfilled  by  any- 
thing short  of  an  Incarnation.  The  Church  has  not 
pronounced  judgment  on  the  question  whether  Christ 
would  have  been  incarnate  ha<l  there  been  no  Fall ; 


Affinity  of  the  Word  to  the  Creation.  163 


but  the  advance  of  thought  in  two  opposite  directions 
appears  to  converge  upon  the  belief  that  it  would 
have  been  so.  The  naturalness  and  fitness  of  the  In- 
carnation in  itself,  apart  from  sin,  is  brought  out  by 
considering  alike  the  source,  and  the  course,  of  the 
work  of  creation. 

In  the  first  place,  the  source  of  creation  is  more 
clearly  seen  than  perhaps  at  any  previous  epoch  in 
the  inner  relations  of  the  Persons  of  the  Blessed 
Trinity.  We  begin  to  have  a  richer  understanding 
of  the  affinity  of  the  Word  to  the  creation,  and  to 
feel  increasinglj^  how  even  His  existence  before  the 
foundation  of  the  world  was,  in  a  sense,  the  basis  and 
beginning  of  it.  His  immanence  in  the  world  as  its 
guiding  principle  seems  to  have  pointed  forward  to 
a  more  explicit  manifestation  of  Himself.  The  very 
nature  of  the  Son  of  God  contains,  we  may  say,  a  pre- 
disposition to  enter  into  the  closest  connexion  with  the 
world  and  with  man.  S.  Athanasius,  after  mention- 
ing with  approval  the  Greek  speculation  that  the 
universe  is  a  great  organic  body,  goes  on  significantly 
to  say,  "  If,  therefore,  the  Word  of  God  is  in  the  world 
as  in  a  body,  what  is  there  strange  in  affirming  that 
He  has  also  entered  into  men  ?  What  is  there  in- 
credible, if,  being  in  men,  He  reveals  Himself  among 
them  ?  It  is  no  strange  thing  if  the  Word,  who  orders 
all  things  and  gives  life  to  all  things,  and  who  willed 
a  revelation  to  come  through  men,  has  used  a  human 
body  for  the  manifestation  of  the  truth  and  making 
known  of  the  Father." 

And,  on  the  other  hand,  what  we  know  of  the 


164    Evohction  leads  up  to  the  Incarnation. 


course  of  the  history  of  nature  leads  up  to  the  same 
expectation.  It  is  true  that  the  doctrine  of  evolution 
has  not  yet  attained  the  consistency  of  proven  fact ; 
but  enough  is  already  certain  to  convince  us  that 
there  has  been  an  onward  and  upward  movement 
in  created  things.  The  inorganic,  the  organic,  the 
sentient,  have  prepared  for  the  rational.  Man  re- 
capitulates them  in  himself,  and  takes  authority  over 
them.  But  must  the  evolution  stop  there  ?  Here  is  a 
being  capable  of  knowing  and  loving  God — a  being 
like  to  God,  and  with  a  "  heart  restless  until  it  rests  in 
Him,"  a  being  capable  (as  we  know  now  by  blessed 
experience)  of  appreciating  an  Incarnation.  Can  we 
imagine  that  he  was  not  intended  to  receive  it,  and 
was  not  made  for  the  purpose  ?  If  it  were  so,  it 
would  seem  to  stultify  that  upward  striving  implanted 
in  nature  before  sin  came.  It  would  be  like  the 
sudden  and  unaccountable  stopping  short  of  some 
series  in  a  calculating-machine.  The  mind  which  has 
followed  the  process  of  the  evolution  thus  far  stands 
demanding  that  the  final  step  should  be  taken.  The 
aptitude  of  the  Word  for  becoming  man,  and  the 
aptitude  of  man  for  receiving  the  Word,  together 
claim  the  Incarnation  as  their  natural  result.  Instead 
of  being  surprised  to  find  the  Word  made  flesh,  we 
might  rather  have  been  surprised  had  it  not  been  so ; 
and  instead  of  turning  to  the  Fall  for  an  explanation 
and  a  cause  of  the  great  mystery,  we  may  wonder 
at  tlie  imperturbable  mercy  whicli  held  on  upon  its 
course  in  spite  of  man's  rebellion. 


Some  other  Form  of  Redemption  cone eiv able,    1 6  5 


§3. 

Neither  have  we  a  right  so  to  limit  the  powers 
of  the  Creator  as  to  say  that  sin  could  not  possibly 
have  been  arrested  and  atoned  for  without  the  Incar- 
nation. It  attributes  too  great  a  skill  to  the  author 
of  sin,  if  we  try  to  make  out  that  no  resource  was  left 
to  God,  if  He  wished  to  be  rid  of  it,  but  to  give  His 
Son  to  die  for  it.  To  have  succeeded  in  reducing  God 
to  such  straits  might  well  appear  like  a  triumph  for 
Satan,  even  though  the  ultimate  victory  remains  with 
God.  Sin  can  be  made  too  much  of.  It  is,  indeed,  a 
vast  and  terrible  factor  in  the  life  of  the  world.  Of 
necessity  it  occupies  a  great  share  of  our  attention. 
All  our  thoughts  are  affected  by  its  presence,  and  to 
fight  against  it  is,  in  a  sense,  the  main  business  of 
our  lives.  It  may  easily  appear  to  us,  then,  as  if 
nothing  short  of  the  Divine  Sacrifice  could  have 
delivered  us  from  it.  Men  sometimes  have  even 
maintained  that  an  infinite  ransom  for  sin  was 
required,  on  the  ground  that  the  offence  itself  was 
infinite.  But  this  is  not  true.  Sin  is  a  finite  thing, 
and  not  an  infinite.  Those  creaturely  minds  and  wills 
which  embody  it  are  themselves  limited ;  and  it  has 
no  existence  outside  of  them.  It  cannot,  therefore,  be 
measured  and  weighed  in  the  balance  against  God. 
If  God's  only  object  was  to  make  an  end  of  sin,  we 
may  conceive  of  His  being  able  to  attain  the  object 
without  so  stupendous  an  act  as  the  Incarnation. 
It  has  been  argued  that  if  anything  less  than  the 
Incarnation  could  have  put  an  end  to  sin,  God  would 


1 66    Becomingness  of  Redemption  by  Christ. 

not  have  committed  Himself  to  such  a  waste  of  power. 
But  this  argument  is  based  on  the  assumption  that 
to  provide  a  remedy  for  sin  was  the  sole  purpose 
of  the  Incarnation.  If  God  had  other,  greater, 
objects  in  view,  the  argument  falls  to  the  ground. 
Some  new  start  for  the  human  race  might,  perhaps, 
have  been  found  on  a  less  exalted  footing.  The 
writer  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  appeals,  not  to 
our  sense  of  logical  necessity,  but  to  our  sense  of 
moral  fitness,  when  he  twice  says  that  God's  method 
of  redemption  was  that  which  in  the  circumstances 
"became"  Him  (Heb.  ii.  10;  vii.  26).  Not  to  have 
redeemed  at  all,  but  to  have  left  the  world,  however 
guilty,  to  its  usurping  conqueror,  would  have  been,  as 
S.  Athanasius  points  out,  in  a  high  degree  "  unbe- 
coming and  unnatural."  But  if  it  became  God  to 
redeem,  tliere  was  no  way  so  becoming  as  that  which 
He  took.  And  its  becomingness  is  brought  out  in  a 
peculiarly  striking  way,  if  we  suppose  that  the  Incar- 
nation is  no  afterthought  consequent  upon  the  Fall, 
but  the  very  thing  for  which  man  was  created. 
Nothing  could  be  so  dignified  and  so  touching  as  to 
proceed  simply  with  the  Divine  plan — not  restoring 
the  world  first,  and  then  effecting  the  Incarnation  in 
humanity  so  restored ;  but  fully  accepting  the  Fall 
and  its  consequences,  and  triumphing  over  it,  and 
even  turning  it  to  account,  by  the  love  which  did  in 
spite  of  it  what  it  had  purposed  to  do  independently 
of  it. 


Other  Benefits  of  the  Incarnation.  167 


§4 

We  are  permitted,  conversely,  to  perceive  that  the 
Incarnation  and  Death  of  Christ  have  actually  brought 
us  blessings  far  wider  than  the  removal  of  sin.  It 
has  often  been  pointed  out  that  the  Nicene  Creed 
itself  suggests  that  the  Son's  condescension  had  other 
purposes  in  view.  "  For  us  men,"  it  says,  "  and  for 
our  salvation  He  came  down  from  heaven.''  The 
two  clauses  do  not  mean  precisely  the  same  thing. 
Christ  had  other  benefits  to  bring  to  "  us  men " 
besides  our  salvation. 

He  has  united  the  Godhead  and  creation  in  a  way 
in  which  nothing  short  of  the  Incarnation  could  (so 
far  as  we  know)  have  united  them.  The  revelation 
of  God  to  man  which  we  now  possess  through  Avitness- 
ing  the  historical  life  of  Christ  is  infinitely  clearer  and 
closer  at  hand  than  anything  which  we  can  imagine 
vouchsafed  in  any  other  way.  Through  that  great 
transaction  man  is  not  merely  restored  to  the  first 
estate  which  Adam  occupied,  but  to  one  immeasur- 
ably higher.  Though  still  suffering  from  the  cor- 
ruption which  the  first  Adam  entailed  to  his 
descendants,  we  are  at  the  same  time  enriched  by 
the  communication  of  the  Divine  nature  in  a  way 
which  Adam  never  knew.  And  the  gathering  up  of 
the  human  race  in  Christ  imparts  a  unity  and  solidity 
to  mankind,  and  to  the  universe  through  mankind, 
which,  so  far  as  we  can  judge,  was  otherwise  unat- 
tainable, much  exceeding  the  unity  and  solidity  which 

I       existed  before  the  Fall. 

i 

I 


i6S 


O  felix  Ctilpa!'' 


And  are  we  to  suppose  that  these  benefits  would 
never  have  been  given  to  men  but  for  their  trans- 
gression ?  Are  they  indeed  a  premium  upon  human 
disobedience  ?  Did  God  intend  something  less  glorious 
for  humanity  as  He  originally  designed  it,  and 
then,  when  He  saw  us  in  rebellion,  devise  for  us 
these  overwhelming  gifts  ?  In  that  case  the  famous 
apostrophe,  "  0  felix  culpa !  " — O  happy  fault ! " 
expresses  a  literal  truth,  and  we  have  not  only  to 
thank  God  for  giving  us  a  Redeemer,  but  to  thank 
Adam  for  drawing  down  to  us,  by  his  sin,  One  who  was 
so  much  more  than  a  redeemer.  The  facts  seem  to 
be  against  such  a  theory.  We  can  hardly  think  that 
God  would  have  punished  the  race  for  loyalty  to  its 
Maker  by  withholding  what  now  He  has  bestowed, 
and  what  He  always  kncAV  Himself  able  to  bestow. 
Long  ages  after  sin  lias  disajopeared  from  existence, 
and  almost  from  the  memory  of  the  saints,  creation 
will  be  rejoicing  more  and  more  in  the  abiding  fruits 
of  the  Incarnation;  and  it  seems  inconceivable  that 
it  should  owe  them  all  to  its  own  aberration  from  the 
Creator's  original  design. 


§  5. 

That  the  Incarnation  was  not  dependent  upon  the 
Fall  seems  to  be  distinctly  involved  in  more  than  one 
passage  of  Holy  Scripture,  especially  in  S.  Paul's 
Epistles  of  the  Captivity.  He  tells  the  Ephesians 
that  ''before  the  foundation  of  the  world" — there- 
fore certainly  before^  the  Fall  of  man— God  "elected 


The  Incarnation  eternally  purposed.    1 69 


us,  having  predestined  us  unto  adoption  through 
Jesus  Christ  unto  Himself  (Eph.  i.  4,  5);  and  that, 
at  length,  He  has  "  made  known  to  us  the  mystery  o£ 
His  will,  according  to  His  good  pleasure,  which  good 
pleasure  He  purposed  before  in  Christ  unto  a  dispen- 
sation o£  the  fulness  of  the  times/' — that  is,  He  was 
reserving  the  announcement  of  His  purpose  until  the 
ripe  moment  should  be  brought  about, — and  this  good 
pleasure  was  "to  sum  up  all  things  in  Christ,  the 
things  in  the  heavens,  and  the  things  on  the  earth,  in 
Him''  (Eph.  i.  9,  10).  And  again,  S.  Paul  declares 
himself  commissioned  "to  divulge  what  is  the  dis- 
pensation of  the  mystery  that  has  been  hidden  away 
since  the  ages  in  God  who  created  all  things,  that 
now  should  be  made  known  to  the  principalities  and 
the  authorities  in  the  heavenly  places,  through  the 
Church,  the  manifold  wisdom  of  God,  according  to  a 
purpose  of  the  ages,  which  purpose  He  formed  in  the 
Christ,  Jesus  our  Lord"  (Eph.  iii.  9-11).  It  may  be 
readily  acknowledged  that  these  passages,  and  similar 
ones  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Colossians  and  elsewhere, 
are  more  or  less  tinged  by  thoughts  of  redemption 
and  suffering,  because  S.  Paul's  purpose  is  rather 
practical  than  speculative,  and  he  deals  with  things 
as  they  are;  but  it  is  at  least  clear  from  them  that 
the  Incarnation,  and  our  union  with  and  in  the 
Incarnate  Son,  was  the  eternal  purpose  of  God, 
formed  before — that  is,  independently  of — the  actual 
history  of  creation,  and  not  devised  after  the  event. 
When  the  "  foundation  of  the  world  "  was  laid,  it  was 
laid  with   a   view  to   the   Incarnation.    The  only 


170        The  Fall  not  ptirposed  at  all. 


question  is  whether  the  Fall  itself  and  its  reparation 
was  part  of  the  fundamental  design. 

Those  who  hold  that  without  it  the  Incarnation 
would  not  have  taken  place  are  bound  to  consider  that 
the  Fall,  as  an  indispensable  preliminary  to  it,  was 
eternally  in  the  Creator's  counsels ;  and  this  is  hardly 
possible  to  maintain.  That  God  foreknew,  indeed, 
the  disobedience  of  His  creature  cannot  be  doubted; 
but  that  He  intended  and  planned  it,  with  the  design 
of  thus  repairing  it,  cannot  be  asserted  without  im- 
piety. It  would  destroy  all  the  sinfulness  of  sin,  or 
rather  it  would  make  God  Himself  the  author  of  it 
and  so  sinful,  if  we  could  believe  that  His  eternal 
purpose  involved  sin  as  a  necessary  element.  And  in 
that  case  the  love  also,  w^hich  is  shown  in  redemption, 
is  emptied  of  its  glory;  for  its  task  is  wholly  self- 
chosen  and  self-imposed.  However  difficult  it  may  be 
for  us  to  adjust  our  conceptions  of  the  relation  between 
the  two,  God's  foreknowledge  and  God's  foreordaining 
are  distinct  conceptions.  In  the  first  place  we  may 
repeat  what  has  already  been  said  that  God's  fore- 
knowledge in  no  way  determines  the  future,  but  is 
rather  determined  by  it.  The  future  becomes  no  dead 
certainty  because  God  foresees  it ;  it  remains  still  and 
for  ever  a  living  thing.  There  is  alwaj^s  room  for 
movement  and  free  play  between  the  Divine  will  and 
the  creaturely  Avill.  It  may  be  "  is  the  word  which 
our  Lord  puts  in  His  Father's  mouth  (S.  Luke  xx.  13). 
The  creature  does  not  execute  a  design  laid  down  for 
it  in  detail  beforehand,  and  God  does  not  will  before- 
hand wluit  tlie  creature  does.    Pcrmissiveh^,  indeed, 


Redemption  conditionally  purposed,  171 


He  wills  it,  or  it  could  not  happen,  but  not  actively  or 
as  its  author.  There  is  no  more  difficulty  in  thinking 
of  God  s  permitting  sin  in  the  sphere  of  His  eternal 
caunsels  than  in  the  course  of  history;  but  on  the 
other  hand  it  would  be  no  more  impossible  for  Him 
actively^  to  will  sin  in  the  course  of  history  than 
actively  to  will  it  in  His  eternal  counsels.  Thus  we 
may  believe  that,  while  the  Atonement  was  from 
eternity  the  conditionaJ  purpose  of  God,  the  Incarna- 
tion was  His  unconditional  purpose — that  He  willed 
His  Son  to  suffer  and  die  for  men  if  man  should  fall, 
but  to  become  man  in  any  case.-^  The  drawing  of  the 
creation  into  union  with  the  Creator,  in  the  Christ, 
Jesus  our  Lord,''  was  contained  in  the  very  idea  of 
creation;  the  circumstances  and  conditions  depended 
upon  the  way  in  which  men  might  choose  to  act.  And, 
as  it  proved,  men  chose  to  act  in  that  way  which 
served  more  than  any  other  to  manifest  the  strength 
and  tenderness  of  God's  love. 

§6. 

In  considering  the  redemptive  work  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  the  human  conscience  demands  that  the 

^  The  popular  phrase,  "  the  Lamb  slain  from  the  foundation  of  the 
world  "  (Rev.  xiii.  8),  is  not  rightly  quoted.  A  comparison  with  Rev. 
xvii.  8  on  the  one  hand,  and  Rev.  v.  12  on  the  other,  will  show  clearly 
that  the  words,  "from  the  foundation  of  the  world,"  belong,  not  to  the 
participial  clause,  "the  Lamb  that  is  slain,"  but  to  the  main  verb, 
"  whose  names  have  not  been  written."  It  refers,  therefore,  to  the 
predestination  of  those  who  are  saved,  not  to  the  eternal  nature  of 
Christ's  sacrifice.  This  latter  thought  is  expressed  more  clearly  else- 
where, as  in  1  S.  Pet.  i.  20,  where  the  words  are,  "  before," — not  merely 
"from"—"  the  foundation  of  the  world." 


1 72    Doctrine  of  Atonement  imist  be  simple. 


theory  of  it  should  be  simple.  No  one  can  rest  with 
confidence  upon  what  is,  on  the  face  of  it,  an  artifice, 
a  scheme.  What  are  called  forensic  doctrines  have 
seemed  to  satisfy  many  hearts,  but  only  so  far  as  they 
were  right  metaphors,  parables  hinting  at  a  fuller 
truth  which  was  consciously  or  unconsciously  felt  to 
lie  behind  them.  If  our  Lord's  work  be  regarded  as  a 
cleverly  devised  legal  contrivance,  it  repels  instead  of 
attracting;  or  if  it  does  not  actually  repel,  it  invites 
criticism  and  admiration  rather  than  worship  and 
devotion.  It  is  only  when  we  strongly  apprehend  the 
naturalness  of  it  all  that  we  are  able  to  embrace  it 
with  a  hearty  faith.  Our  Lord's  redeeming  work  may 
be  infinitely  complicated.  It  'may  have  many  more 
aspects  and  a  greater  number  of  effects  than  we  can 
imagine.  It  would  not  be  natural  were  it  otherwise  . 
for  all  that  is  natural  is  complex.  But  its  complica- 
tions must  be  those  which  belong  to  life,  capable  of 
being  resolved  into  a  simple  and  majestic  unity,  and 
not  the  complications  of  a  studied  mechanism. 

This  we  firmly  believe  to  be  the  character  of  the 
Catholic  doctrine  of  Kedemption.  However  deep  it 
goes,  however  subtle  its  adaptation  to  its  purposes, 
however  varied  its  results,  the  whole  of  Redemption 
rises,  as  it  were  without  an  effort,  out  of  the  fact  that 
the  Redeemer  was  what  He  was,  and  acted  always 
according  to  His  nature.  We  have  already  drawn 
attention  to  the  truth  that  there  was  nothing  far- 
fetched in  the  choice  of  a  redeemer,  but  that  He  who 
undertook  it,  undertook  it  because  it  was  His  natural 
place  to  do  so.    And  in  like  mannei',  His  method  of 


Need  of  Revelation  of  God's  Character.  173 


doing  what  He  came  on  earth  to  do  was  natural  and 
simple.  There  was  no  going  out  of  His  way,  no 
straining  after  bye-ends  and  cross-purposes.  From 
moment  to  moment  He  lived  the  life  which  (being 
what  He  was)  He  could  not  but  live ;  and  it  had  the 
infinite  effects  which  (that  life  being  His)  it  could 
not  help  having.  When  He,  to  whom  everything 
pointed  as  the  obvious  Mediator  between  God  and 
men,  began  and  carried  through  to  the  end  His  his- 
toric work,  His  mode  of  operation  was  only  this — to 
be  Himself,  very  God  and  very  Man,  and  to  act 
becomingly  in  the  circumstances.  In  the  unity  of 
His  Person  all  contradiction  was  reconciled,  and  the 
same  things  which  became  Him  as  Son  of  God  be- 
came Him  as  Son  of  Man,  and  the  very  same  line  of 
events  showed  Him  throughout  as  the  ideal  repre- 
sentative both  of  the  one  nature  and  of  the  other. 
This  double  aspect  of  each  and  all  of  our  Lord's  works 
must  never  be  forgotten.  He  was  not  by  one  series 
of  acts  showing  Himself  as  Son  of  God,  and  by  another 
as  Son  of  Man.  There  was  in  Him  no  alternation 
between  two  parts  which  were  to  be  played.  He  was 
continuously  and  harmoniously  both.  Thus  we  may, 
for  clearness  of  study,  contemplate  His  whole  life  and 
death,  first  as  the  manifestation  of  God  to  man,  and 
secondly  as  the  representation  of  man  to  God. 

§  7. 

The  true  manifestation  of  God  to  man  is  the  first 
great  need  in  the  Atonement.  For  the  main  object 
of  the  Atonement  is  a  moral  not  a  legal  one.    It  is 


1 74       Mens  Misconceptions  of  God 


not  only  satisfaction  for  past  offences,  but  the  removal 
of  sin  for  the  future.  And  sin  for  the  future  can  only 
be  precluded  by  fully  persuading  the  wills  of  men  to 
give  it  up.  And  the  only  chance  of  their  being  able 
to  give  it  up  lies  in  their  being  brought  into  frank 
and  normal  relations  with  God  Himself.  This  was  an 
impossibility  for  man  as  he  was.  His  alienation  from 
God  was  too  deep  to  be  easily  got  over.  He  had 
learned  to  travestie  and  caricature  to  himself  the 
nature  and  mind  of  God  in  a  thousand  ways.  The 
more  unlike  to  God  he  became,  so  much  the  more  he 
thought  wickedly  that  God  was  even  such  an  one  as 
himself"  (Ps.  1.  21).  To  the  minds  of  the  heathen  in 
general,  God  was  no  better  than  men,  and  would  con- 
demn Himself  if  He  condemned  them ;  or  He  was 
indifferent  to  their  actions,  and,  as  an  early  con- 
troversialist against  Christianity  affirmed,  was  "  no 
more  angry  with  men  than  with  apes  or  flies ; or 
God  was  capricious  and  revengeful  and  implacable, 
and  the  utmost  that  could  be  done  was  to  endeavour 
to  keep  Him  in  good  temper  with  fair  words  and 
frequent  offerings ;  or  perhaps  He  appeared,  as  in 
some  of  the  higher  Gentile  systems,  and  to  some 
amongst  the  Jews,  as  a  sternly  pure  being,  extreme 
to  mark  what  was  done  amiss,  who  might  give  a 
liappier  lot  in  another  world  in  exchange  for  ascetic 
self-torture  in  this,  or  for  rigid  observance  of  a  rule 
more  exact  than  that  which  He  had  Himself  imposed. 
But  in  whichever  way  the  error  travelled,  mankind 
at  large  had  lost  the  true  conception  of  God  as  a 
righteous  Father;  that  is,  as  One  who  must  needs 


removed  by  Christ's  Life  and  Words,  175 

be  at  Wiir  with  sin  wherever  sin  was  to  be  found,  but 
who  at  the  same  time  loved  men  with  an  intense  and 
personal  affection,  and  was  therefore  impelled  equally 
by  love  and  by  righteousness  to  seek  to  deliver  them 
from  sin. 

This  was  the  character  displayed  in  Christ  to  draw 
men  back  to  God.  Prophets  among  the  Israelites 
had  striven  to  portray  such  a  character;  and  more 
dimly  moral  philosophers  among  the  Gentiles  had  set 
forth  fragments  of  it.  But  the  fullest  of  inspired 
descriptions  could  not  have  the  same  effect  as  the 
sight  of  an  actual  life  lived  among  men,  simply  and 
necessarily  exhibiting  at  every  turn  the  mind  of  God. 
In  all  the  infinitely  varied  circumstances  of  that  life, 
in  dealino;  with  saints  and  in  dealino-  with  sinners, 
there  was  one  continuous  manifestation  of  the  Father's 
heart ;  so  that  without  a  touch  of  exaggeration  Christ 
could  say,  ''He  that  hath  seen  Me,  hath  seen  the 
Father "  (S.  John  xiv.  9).  For  although  they  did  not 
see  the  Father  in  person,  they  saw  One  who  not  only 
resembled  Him  exactly,  so  that  there  was  nothing  in 
the  Son  unlike  that  which  was  in  the  Father,  but  He 
whom  they  saw  was  so  entirely  one  with  the  Father 
that  He  could  have  no  imaginable  being  apart  from 
the  Father,  nor  the  Father  apart  from  Him. 

§  8' 

Our  Lord's  words  gave  articulate  and  explicit 
expression  to  the  message  of  His  life.  What  He  did 
and  was  amongst  men  no  doubt  proved  the  most 
eloquent  way  of  setting  forth  the  truth  about  God. 


176     Christ  reveals  God's  Fatherliness. 


Yet  as  words  without  deeds  are  disbelieved,  so  deeds 
Avitliout  words  are  misunderstood.  If  our  Lord  had 
been  content  to  work  His  miracles  and  say  nothing 
about  the  God  who  had  sent  Him,  or,  in  His  own 
phrase,  if  He  had  "  come  in  His  own  name  "  (S.  John 
V.  43),  He  would  have  had  it  all  His  own  way.  Men 
might  even  have  contrasted  Him  invidiously  with  the 
God  whom  they  so  misinterpreted.  But  with  the 
utmost  persistence  and  vigilance  He  made  it  His  rule 
to  trace  every  deed  of  His,  and  every  word,  to  its 
source  in  the  Fathers  heart,  as  something  "given" 
Him  to  do  or  to  say.  He  claimed  to  be  the  absolute 
and  only  exponent  of  the  Father  s  mind.  Amidst  all 
the  differences  between  the  Fourth  Gospel  and  the 
others,  this  great  feature  stands  out  perfectly  clear  in 
all  alike  :  "  No  man  knoweth  the  Father  save  the  Son, 
and  he  to  whomsoever  the  Son  is  pleased  to  reveal 
Him''  (S.  Matt.  xi.  27).  And  the  main  characteristic 
of  the  new  revelation  is  precisely  that  fatherliness  of 
God  towards  men.  The  language  was  indeed  not 
entirely  new  to  men.  Isaiah  had  said,  "  Now,  O 
Lord,  Thou  art  our  Father''  (Isa.  Ixiv.  8);  and  S. 
Paul  could  quote  a  heathen  testimony  of  like  nature, 
''We  are  also  His  offspring"  (Acts  xvii.  28).  But 
not  only  were  such  expressions  rare  before; — they 
were  mainly  intended  to  appeal  to  a  fatherhood  of 
origination  rather  than  to  a  fatherliness  of  disposition. 
And  while  Christ  revealed  more  clearly  tlian  ever 
that  God  was  the  ultimate  source  of  our  being,  He 
revealed  in  a  still  more  striking  and  persuasive  way 
tliat  the  heart  wliich  is  tlie  source  of  our  l)eing  is 


The  Reconciliation  not  nrnttLal. 


truly,  and  in  spite  of  all  our  sin,  a  Father  s  heart.  It 
is  by  the  perfect  way  in  which  He  did  this,  by  word 
and  deed,  that  Christ  is  to  us  the  ideal  Prophet. 

§  9. 

The  gift  of  His  Incarnate  Son,  even  prior  to  the 
thought  of  what  the  Son  did  for  us,  was  a  proof  of 
the  Father  s  good  will.  It  is  difficult  to  understand 
how,  in  the  teeth  of  Holy  Scripture,  some  misrepre- 
sentations of  the  doctrine  of  the  Atonement,  formerly 
popular,  but  now  fast  vanishing  away,  can  ever  have 
come  to  exist.  The  expression  found  in  the  Anglican 
Articles,  that  Christ  suffered  "  to  reconcile  His  Father 
to  us,"  is  one  for  which  a  true  meaning  can  indeed 
be  found,  but  which  is  not  itself  scriptural.  Often 
as  S.  Paul  uses  the  words  reconciliation "  and  to 
reconcile  (/caraXXay?/,  KaraXXao-cEfy,  aTroKaToKkaauHv) 
of  the  work  of  Christ,  he  never  uses  them  (nor  does 
any  other  New  Testament  writer)  of  the  reconciliation 
of  God  to  His  creature,  but  always  of  tlie  reconcilia- 
tion of  the  creature  to  God.  A  different  compound  of 
the  verb  (SiaXXacro-f  tv),  a  slight  modification  of  the  con- 
struction, would  have  suggested  that  a  mutual  recon- 
ciliation of  the  two  parties  was  effected  through  the 
good  offices  of  Christ,  who  had  the  interests  of  both 
parties  equally  at  heart.  But  S.  Paul  will  give  no 
colour  to  any  theory  of  the  kind.  Christ's  mediator- 
ship  is  not  of  such  a  sort.  He  does  not  occupy  a 
ground  of  friendly  neutrality  between  contending 
parties;  He  is  entirely  on  the  side  of  both.  He 
arranges  no  compromise  or  accommodation  between 

N 


178       God  not  estranged  front  Man. 


them ;  He  exacts  to  the  utmost  the  full  claims  of  God, 
while  He  obtains  for  man  terms  infinitely  better  than 
man  would  ever  have  dreamt  of 

For  indeed,  as  S.  Paul's  language  appears  studi- 
ously to  convey,  the  alienation  is  not  a  mutual  aliena- 
tion. The  estrangement  is  wholly  on  one  side.  It  is 
only  the  offending  party  which  demurs  to  a  relation 
of  sweet  concord.  The  One  who  alone  has  had  cause 
of  complaint  has  never  been  unwilling  to  heal  the 
breach.  It  is  true  that  God  has  been  deeply  dis- 
pleased and  grieved  and  angered,  and  even,  we  might 
say   (though   the  expression  is  not  in  the  Bible), 

offended."  So  long  as  men  cleave  to  their  sin.  He 
cannot,  of  course,  deal  with  them  as  if  they  had  never 
done  wrong  or  as  if  they  were  penitent  for  it.  But 
He  has  never  turned  away  from  them,  except  for 
purposes  of  gracious  discipline,  and  has  never  ceased 
for  an  instant  to  make  the  most  generous  advances  to 
them,  and  to  devise  ways  by  which  the  race,  and  each 
individual  member  of  it,  may  be  brought  into  such 
conditions  that  the  forgiveness  which  He  longs  to 
bestow  may  be  actually  bestowed  and  accepted. 

If,  indeed,  the  Father  had  been  in  any  other  sense 

offended with  men,  Christ  could  not  have  under- 
taken to  mediate.  To  imagine  it  would  be  to  separate 
the  Son  from  the  Father  in  a  way  altogether  im- 
possible. There  can  be  no  division  of  will  or  thought 
between  the  Two ;  for  the  Two  are  not  only  in  moral 
agreement,  but  are  one  in  actual  essence.  What  the 
Son  loves,  the  Father  loves,  and  to  the  same  degree. 
What  the  Father  hates,  the  Son  hates,  and  to  the 


Salvation  specially  ascribed  to  the  Father.     1 79 


same  degree.  The  one  can  be  no  kinder  and  no 
sterner  than  the  other.  It  is  the  will  of  the  Father, 
as  much  as  it  is  the  will  of  the  Son,  to  redeem 
mankind. 

But  more  than  this.  The  relation  of  the  Son  to 
the  Father  is  such  that  the  Son  cannot  be  regarded  as 
the  originator  of  the  method  of  redemption.  Human 
imagination  has  depicted  Him  as  coming  forward  in 
the  councils  of  Heaven,  and  offering  to  solve  the 
problem  by  an  incarnation  and  death.  It  is,  however, 
clear,  that  the  Eternal  Word  initiates  and  can  initiate 
nothing  in  the  Divine  schemes.  So  to  suppose  would 
be  to  make  two  Gods.  Our  Lord  perpetually  speaks 
of  Himself  as  "  sent."  He  speaks  of  a  commandment 
given  to  Him,  which  He  obeys.  The  Father  has  not 
accepted  a  spontaneous  offer  of  self-sacrifice  on  the 
part  of  the  Son,  but  has  Himself  imposed  the  self- 
sacrifice  upon  Him;  while  the  Son,  in  that  absolute 
union  with  the  Father  which  is,  by  the  Spirit,  a  free 
and  loving  union,  rejoices  to  devote  Himself  to  the 
task  which  glorifies  the  holiness  and  love  of  the 
Father.  Thus  it  comes  about  that  the  Atonement  is 
constantly  spoken  of  in  Scripture  as  in  a  special 
sense  the  Father's  work.  In  the  Pastoral  Epistles, 
which  exhibit  S.  Paul's  final  and  most  matured 
thought,  the  most  frequent  title  of  the  Father,  not 
used  by  him  before,  is  that  of  "  God  our  Saviour " 
{e.g.  1  Tim.  i.  1).  He  still,  indeed,  speaks  of  Christ 
also,  as  is  natural,  under  the  title  of  Saviour  (as 
2  Tim.  i.  10) ;  but  he  seems  at  the  same  time  to 
delight  in  tracing  our  salvation  to  its  yet  deeper 


i8o    Christ's  Sufierings  prove  God's  Love. 


origin  in  the  mind  of  the  Father,  Avho  has  saved  us 
through  His  Son. 

§  10. 

Nor  is  the  good  will  of  the  Father  towards  men 
displayed  in  having  merely  desired  their  salvation, 
and  willed  that  His  Son  should  undertake  it.  Even 
the  nature  and  extent  of  the  sufferings  of  Christ  are 
adduced  by  the  sacred  writers  as  a  proof  and  measure 
of  the  Father's  love  towards  us.  It  is  not  only  the 
love  of  Jesus  Christ  Himself  which  is  shown  by  the 
Cross.  The  love  of  the  Father  is,  in  a  peculiar 
manner,  credited  with  it  all.  If  it  be  true  to  say  of 
Christ,  "  He  loved  me,  and  gave  Himself  for  me " 
(Gal.  ii.  20),  it  is  no  less  true  to  say,  "  So  God  loved 
the  world,  that  He  gave  His  only -begotten  Son 
(S.  John  iii.  16),  and  "  Herein  is  love,  not  that  Ave 
loved  God,  but  that  He  loved  us,  and  sent  His  Son  to 
be  the  propitiation  for  our  sins''  (1  S.  John  iv.  10); 
and  again,  to  take  the  witness  of  another  Apostle, 
"  The  love  of  God  hath  been  shed  abroad  in  our 
hearts  through  the  Holy  Ghost  which  was  given  to 
us.  For  Christ,  while  we  were  yet  weak,  in  due  time 
died  for  ungodly  ones.  For  scarcely  for  a  righteous 
man  will  one  die  (for  the  good  man,  indeed,  perad- 
venture  some  one  may  even  dare  to  die) ;  but  God  to 
us  commendetli  His  own  love,  because,  while  we  were 
yet  sinners,  Christ  died  for  us  "  (Rom.  v.  5,  6). 

There  is,  indeed,  this  clement  of  truth  even  in 
Patripassianism.  It  was,  of  course,  impossible,  in  tlic 
nature  of  things,  that  the  Father  Himself  should  be 


The  Father  ivounded  throi{o[h  the  Son.  i8i 


incarnate,  and  should  suffer  and  die  for  us,  while  the 
Son  remained  aloof.  Any  imagination  of  the  kind 
must  spring  out  of  a  Tritheistic  idea,  and  ignores  the 
necessary  relations  of  the  Blessed  Persons.  But  the 
Father  cannot  have  been  indifferent  to  the  sufferings 
of  His  beloved  Son.  On  the  contrary,  we  may  with- 
out irreverence  guess  from  the  feelings  of  earthly 
parents,  which  are  the  imperfect  reflexion  of  His,  that 
the  suffering  and  grief  of  the  Father,  in  delivering  up 
His  Son  for  us  all,  was  even  greater  than  what  He 
would  have  endured  if  He  could  have  borne  it  all  in 
His  own  Person.  A  pious  cottager  on  hearing  the 
text,  "  God  so  loved  the  world,"  exclaimed,  "  Ah  !  that 
%ms  love !  I  could  have  given  myself,  but  I  could 
never  have  given  my  son."  If  this  be  true,  we  may 
read  in  the  Crucifixion  not  only  the  indignation  and 
pain  of  the  Father  at  men  s  sin,  but  the  intensity  of 
His  love  for  the  sinners,  which  made  Him  willing  to 
endure  such  anguish,  a  thousandfold  the  more  acute 
for  being  inflicted,  not  on  Him,  but  on  One  dearer 
than  Himself. 

The  prophet  foretold  this  wounding  of  the  Father 
through  the  heart  of  the  Son,  when  he  said,  ^^Thej^ 
shall  look  on  Me  whom  they  have  pierced,  and  shall 
mourn  for  Him"  (Zech.  xii.  10).  Convinced  of  the 
love  which  we  have  outraged  by  our  sin,  we  are 
forced  into  an  attitude  of  penitence.  Penitence  is 
nothing  else  but  love,  convicted  of  having  wronged 
the  beloved.  Nothing  purges  the  soul  of  sin  like 
penitence.  No  conviction  of  the  abstract  righteous- 
ness of  the  law,  still  less  any  pressure  from  fear  of 


1 82    God's  Righteottsness  cleared  by  the  Cross. 


the  consequences  of  sin  to  our  own  souls,  would 
have  bred  that  passion  for  holiness  which  springs  up 
naturally  when  the  heart  perceives  what  has  been 
the  mind  of  God  towards  it  throughout.  Thus  the 
Cross  of  Christ  reconciles  men  to  God  by  making 
them  abhor  and  abjure  sin.  There  is  no  standing 
out  against  it.  The  love  of  Christ  constraineth  us  " 
(2  Cor.  V.  14). 

§  11. 

But  the  doctrine  of  the  Atonement  would  lose  all 
its  meaning  for  us,  if  we  were  to  suppose  that  Christ 
aimed  at  nothing  else  but  turning  men  from  sin  for 
the  future ;  or  if  we  could  believe  that  He  aimed  only 
at  shewing  that  God  still  cared  for  us.  The  Atone- 
ment had  also  a  retrospective  side.  It  revealed  the 
judgment  of  God  upon  past  sin  also.  It  was  most 
necessarj^  that  the  character  of  God  should  be  cleared. 
The  "silence"  which  God  had  kept  (Ps.  1.  21)  in  view 
of  men's  sins  was  mercifully  designed.  He  "  winked 
at  the  sins  of  men,  because  they  should  amend" 
(Wisd.  xi.  23).  A  premature  disclosure  of  all  His 
burning  indignation  would  have  terrified  men  into 
despair,  and  would  have  frustrated  the  attempt  to 
rid  them  of  sin.  But  this  reticence  on  tlie  part  of 
God  was  liable  to  be  misunderstood.  It  might  have 
been  thought  tliat,  after  all,  God  did  not  care  much 
about  men's  sin;  that  He  was  easy,  good-natured, 
indulgent ;  that  on  occasion,  indeed.  He  used  strong 
words  against  sin,  but  tliat  His  words  were  sterner 
than  His  deeds.    To  remove  such  a  misconception 


Christ  represents  the  hitman  Conscience.  183 


was,  to  say  the  least  of  it,  as  marked  a  feature  of 
the  Atonement  as  the  demonstration  of  His  love. 
"God,"  says  S.  Paul,  "set  forth  Christ  Jesus  to  be 
a  propitiation,  through  faith,  by  His  blood,  to  shew 
His  righteousness,  because  of  the  passing  over  of  the 
sins  done  aforetime  in  the  forbearance  of  God, — for 
the  shewing,  I  say,  of  His  righteousness  at  this  present 
season :  that  He  might  Himself  be  just,  and  the  justi- 
fier  of  him  that  hath  faith  in  Jesus"  (Rom.  iii.  25,  26). 
And,  indeed,  unless  we  bear  this  in  mind,  the  Cross 
is  no  very  cogent  proof  of  love.  It  is  only  in  pro- 
portion as  we  recognise  the  hatefulness  of  sin  in  God's 
eyes — His  perfect  loathing  and  detestation  of  having 
anything  to  do  with  it — that  we  see  the  magnitude 
of  the  sacrifice  which  He  made  for  us,  in  not  only 
bearing  so  long  with  it,  but  at  last  giving  His  Son 
to  hear  it.  It  was  this  identifying  of  His  Son  for 
our  sakes  with  all  that  God  most  abominates,  which 
shews  the  depth  of  His  f atherliness  :  "  He  made  Him 
to  be  sin  for  us,  who  knew  no  sin,  that  we  might  be 
made  the  righteousness  of  God  in  Him  "  (2  Cor.  v.  21), 

§  12. 

So  far  we  have  considered  the  atoning  work  of 
Christ  as  a  true  exhibition  of  the  mind  of  God  to- 
wards  sinful  men,  both  in  its  stern  and  in  its  tender 
aspect,  thus  at  the  same  moment  wooing  them  and 
warning  them  back  from  sin  to  God.  But  our 
Redeemer  is  as  truly  man  as  He  is  God.  He  repre- 
sents, therefore,  with  equal  fidelity,  the  response  of 
the  human  conscience  to  the  revelation  thus  made. 


184    Redemptive  Aspect  of  Christ's  Life. 


He  redeemed  mankind  by  the  perfectness  with  which 
He  responded  to  It. 

We  may,  perhaps,  consider  first  the  response  as 
shewn  in  His  life.  It  is  a  loss  to  the  Church  when 
the  redemptive  character  of  the  life  of  Jesus  upon 
earth  is  forgotten,  and  when  His  death  alone  is  con- 
sidered in  that  light.  When  this  is  the  case,  the  three 
and  thirty  years  of  His  sojourn  come  to  be  regarded 
as  serving  only  to  set  an  example  to  men,  or  as  a 
time  of  teaching  and  preaching.  If  attention  turns 
at  all  to  His  life  in  itself,  apart  from  its  didactic 
effect,  the  life  wears  the  look  of  being  only  a  neces- 
sary preliminary  to  dying,  or  at  best  of  qualifying  for 
a  work  of  atonement  at  the  close. 

We  do  not  mean  to  deny  that  such  views  of  our 
Lord's  life  are  true,  but  to  assert  that  they  are  only 
partial.  It  is  most  important,  for  instance,  to  con- 
sider our  Lord  as  the  Example  and  Pattern  whom  we 
are  to  imitate.  He  revealed  to  men  in  His  life  the 
true  ideal  of  manhood,  as  well  as  the  true  conception 
of  God.  The  one  revelation  was  as  necessary  as  the 
other,  for  both  had  been  equally  obscured.  Mankind, 
as  S.  Athanasius  says,  was  made  to  be  a  picture  of 
the  Eternal  Son ;  but  the  picture  was  become  so 
blurred  and  begrimed,  that  it  could  not  be  restored 
without  the  appearance  of  Him  whose  portrait  it  was 
intended  for.  He  shewed  us  by  example  what  is  the 
true  relation  of  the  creature  to  tlie  Creator.  He 
shewed  us  what  sonship  is,  and  iii  His  conduct  to- 
wards men  He  shewed  us  also  wliat  1)rotherliood  is. 

But  His  life  was  far  more  than  an  example  for  ns. 


Christ's  Life  fttlfils  the  Ideal  for  Man.  185 


As  such,  it  would  have  daunted  us  at  least  as  much 
as  it  would  have  stimulated,  because  Christ  did  not 
start  with  our  disadvantages.  Christ's  life  had  a 
value  on  our  behalf  quite  independent  of  its  moral 
effect  on  us.  It  had  a  value  on  our  behalf  towards 
God.  He  lived,  as  He  died,  the  true  Representative 
Man.  He  displayed  before  the  eyes  of  the  Creator 
His  own  ideal  for  mankind  perfectly  realised.  Once 
more  there  was  something  in  mankind  upon  which 
the  regard  of  God  could  rest  with  satisfaction.  One 
generation  of  men  after  another  had  come  and  gone 
since  the  first  Fall,  and  all  had  been  sinful.  Some 
men  had  been  better  than  others,  and  ofiered  points 
of  hope ;  but  all  had  proved  faulty.  It  was  a  series 
of  disappointments  and  failures.  There  was  nothing 
which  came  up  to  the  requirements  of  God,  nothing 
which  did  not  in  some  degree  move  the  Holy  One  to 
displeasure  and  abomination.  It  seemed  as  if  Satan's 
triumph  over  the  race  was  complete  and  irreversible, 
and  that  all  men  must  necessarily  sin.  But  such  an 
induction  w^ould  have  been  hasty-  It  w^ould  have 
ignored  a  fundamental  fact  in  the  conception  of 
humanity.  The  members  must  not  be  reckoned 
without  the  Head.  Humanity  without  Christ  is  not 
humanity.  It  is,  as  an  able  writer  has  pointed  out, 
the  mistake  of  the  Positivist  Religion  to  think  so,  and 
to  worship  humanity  to  the  exclusion  of  Christ.  But 
if  it  is  a  mistake  to  exclude  Christ  and  worship  w^hat 
remains  of  humanity,  so  is  it  a  mistake,  by  the  exclu- 
sion of  Christ,  to  reckon  humanity  as  lost.  Even  if 
we  could  consider  Christ    as   a  private  individual 


1 86         Christ  necessarily  impeccable, 


human  being,  yet,  if  He  is  really  human,  there  is  at 
least  one  sound  spot  in  human  nature.  But  Christ 
is  not,  and  cannot  be,  a  private,  casual,  human  being. 
He  occupies  the  unique  position  of  the  Second  Adam, 
the  necessary  "  Head  of  every  man "  (1  Cor.  xi.  3). 
Therefore,  until  Christ  be  fallen,  humanity  is  not 
wholly  lost.  Christ's  perfect  life  offers  a  firm  rallying- 
point  for  all  that  is  human  to  gather  round.  In  spite 
of  the  defection  of  many,  God  sees  in  Him  what  He 
desired  to  see;  and  as  at  the  first  bright  beginning 
of  human  life  in  Eden,  He  could  say  that  it  was 
very  good  "  (Gen.  i.  31),  so,  looking  down  again  upon 
human  life  in  Jesus,  He  could  bear  testimony,  "  This 
is  My  beloved  Son,  in  whom  I  am  well  pleased" 
(S.  Matt.  iii.  17). 

§13. 

The  Second  Adam,  no  less  than  the  first,  had  to 
pas^  through  His  probation.  That  probation  of  the 
Incarnate  Son  is  by  no  means  easy  to  understand. 
Any  firm  grasp  of  the  facts  of  the  case  makes  it  clear, 
to  begin  with,  that  Christ  could  not  sin.  To  suppose 
Him  peccable,  however  sinless,  or  fallible,  however 
free  from  actual  error,  betrays  a  Nestorian  conception 
of  His  Person  ;  it  shews  that  He  is  thought  of  as  pos- 
sessed of  a  doul)le  personalit}^— a  Divine  Being  lodged 
in  a  man. 

Christ  is  a  single  Person,  and  tliat  Person  is  a 
Divine  Person.  In  that  accommodation  of  Himself 
to  human  limitations  wliich  S.  Paul  speaks  of  as 
''emptying  Himself  (Phil.  ii.  7),  He  by  no  means 


yet  ftdly  liable  to  Temptation.  187 


emptied  Himself  of  His  essential  holiness ;  He  only 
caused  that  holiness,  like  His  love,  of  which  it  is  a 
part,  to  manifest  itself  under  new  conditions.  But 
the  conditions  under  which  this  indefeasible  holiness 
was  manifested  were  those  of  a  real  and  a  progressive 
human  nature.  The  Divinity  of  His  Person  did  not 
lift  Him  up  out  of  the  reach  of  natural  human  wants 
and  impulses.  Quite  the  contrary.  Amongst  our- 
selves, an  intellectual  man  is  sometimes  so  absorbed 
in  his  intellectual  pursuits  as  to  become  oblivious  of 
lower  necessities.  But  with  Christ  this  was  not — at 
least  not  usually — the  case.  He  was  never  absent.'' 
It  was  part  of  His  perfection  to  be  keenly  alive  to 
everything.  When  we  read  that  on  a  certain  occasion 
Jesus  ''troubled  Himself (S.  John  xi.  33),  voluntarily 
breaking  up  the  serenity  that  was  natural  to  Him,  in 
order  to  enter  with  conscious  completeness  into  the  woe 
with  which  He  was  surrounded,  we  have  an  illustra- 
tion of  what  was  habitual  to  Him.  His  very  Divinity 
made  it  possible  for  Him  more  fully  than  for  others  to 
taste  the  ingredients  of  human  life.  And  although, 
by  His  freedom  from  original  sin,  He  had  none  of  the 
vicious  and  depraved  desires  which  are  congenital  to 
us,  and  could  only  think  of  such  with  an  instinctive 
abhorrence,  yet,  being  human.  He  could  not  fail  to  be 
tempted  by  the  same  things  which  had  tempted  our 
first  parents.  Bodily  pains  and  pleasures  found  in 
Him  the  most  exquisitely  sensitive  nerves  to  which 
they  had  ever  appealed.  He  had  a  human  intellect 
and  imagination,  of  which  Aristotle,  Alexander,  Dante, 
Raffaelle,  Beethoven,  afford  feeble  and  stunted  types ; 


i88    Christ  actually  tempted  more  than  others. 


and  it  carmot  have  been  easy  to  forgo  the  prospects 
opened  out  by  the  possession  of  such  powers.  His 
human  spirit  met  its  peculiar  trial,  in  the  very  close- 
ness of  its  association  with  the  Divine  nature. 

Although,  therefore,  He  could  not  fall,  He  could 
be  tempted.  There  was  no  risk  of  His  choosing 
wrong,  but  He  felt  the  hardship  of  choosing  right. 
His  human  nature  could  not  be  torn  away  from  the 
Divine — that  is,  from  Himself ;  but  it  could  be  racked 
by  the  strain  of  keeping  up  with  it.  The  very  fact 
that  His  human  nature  was  healthy,  and  could  only 
be  inclined  to  things  good  in  their  kind,  made  it  all 
the  harder  to  sacrifice  them  to  a  higher  purpose.  We 
may  truly  say  that  our  Lord  not  only  could  be  tempted, 
but  that  He  had  a  greater  susceptibility  to  temptation 
than  any  other  human  being.  And  at  the  same  time, 
the  crafts  and  assaults  of  the  Tempter  were  more  art- 
fully and  more  persistently  concentrated  upon  Him 
tlian  upon  any  other.  It  is  a  mistake  to  suppose  that 
He  was  only  tempted  during  the  forty  days  in  the 
wilderness.  Those  forty  days  were  a  fierce  and  typical 
outbreak  of  new  temptations  such  as  He  had  been 
incapal)le  of  l)efore  His  Baptism  ;  but  we  are  signifi- 
cantly told  that,  at  the  close  of  them,  the  devil 
departed  from  Him  for  a  season  "  (S.  Luke  iv.  13). 
It  was  a  short  lull,  and  the  storm  was  but  gathering 
sti*ength  to  burst  upon  Him  again. 

And  as  the  temptation  was  true  human  temptation, 
so  was  the  victory  true  human  victory.  It  was  not, 
indeed,  the  \'ictory  of  a  man  overcoming  by  sheer 
force  of  liumau  will  without  the  assistance  of  Divine 


Christ  conquers  l^emptation  as  Man,  i8g 


grace ;  but  neither  was  it  the  victory  of  a  God,  over- 
coming by  His  Divine  force  and  silencing  and  ignor- 
ing His  human  feelings.  It  was  the  victory  of  One 
who  had  thrown  His  whole  self  into  human  conditions, 
and  fought  with  no  weapons  but  those  which  are 
common  to  men,  such  as  prayer  and  fasting  and 
vigilance.  Christ's  life  was  a  life  of  faith,  like  that  of 
His  brethren  (Heb.  ii.  13).  If  His  spotless  character 
was  appealed  to  by  those  who  wished  to  emulate  it, 
He  taught  them  the  secret  of  its  spotlessness  by  point- 
ing them  to  the  source  from  which  they,  as  Avell  as 
He,  might  derive  holiness.  Why  callest  thou  Me 
good  ?  there  is  none  good  save  One,  that  is,  God 
(S.  Mark  x.  18).  It  was  not,  we  may  believe,  by 
drawing  upon  a  reserve  of  superhuman  powers  of  His 
own  that  Christ  resisted  temptation  while  on  earth, 
but  by  a  humble  and  creaturely  dependence  upon 
God.  That  position  of  dependence  He  could  not  have 
abandoned  without  ceasing  to  be  Himself,  which  was 
impossible ;  but  His  human  faculties  freely  chose  the 
position. 

When  the  Church  teaches  that  Christ  was  im- 
peccable, she  teaches  no  arbitrary  dogma.  The 
inability  to  sin  was  not  a  mechanical  inability,  the 
result  of  inherent  apathy  towards  the  objects  of 
temptation ;  still  less  was  it  the  result  of  any  sys- 
tem of  special  protections.  The  fulness  of  Christ's 
humanity  presented  an  almost  infinite  frontier  to 
assault ;  and  there  was  no  spot  at  which  the  assault 
was  not  attempted.  He  was  in  all  points  tempted 
like  as  we  are,  yet  witliout  sin  "  (Heb.  iv.  15). 


1 90     Christ  not  only  sinless,  but  perfect. 


%  14. 

But  to  say  that  Christ  was  sinless — "  as  a  lamb 
without  blemish  and  without  spot"  (1  Pet.  i.  19) — is 
but  one  side,  the  negative  side,  of  His  redeeming  life. 
It  represents  a  larger  and  more  positive  notion  to 
speak  of  His  life  as  perfect.  It  was  not  only  unsullied 
by  gins  of  commission,  but  its  splendour  was  undi- 
minished by  any  sin  of  omission.  Nothing  was  lacking 
to  it.  Not  that  it  was  a  perfection  stereotyped  from 
the  first,  and  unchangeable.  It  was  a  perfection  that 
increased  and  developed  from  year  to  year.  Conceived 
without  sin  as  He  was,  the  initial  fashioning  of  His 
human  nature  was  a  perfect  fashioning.  He  became 
a  perfect  Infant,  a  perfect  Boy,  a  perfect  young  Man. 
He  would  not  have  been  so,  had  He  possessed  at  three 
years  okb  or  at  thirteen,  the  mature  powers  of  the 
man  of  thirty ;  for  a  perfect  childhood  must  mean  a 
perfect  compliance  with  all  the  conditions  of  child- 
hood. Gradually  the  holiness  which  was  never  absent 
from  Him  was  absorbed  by  His  human  nature,  and 
made  more  and  more  consciously  its  own.  The  will 
of  the  Father,  which  in  infancy  had  been  instinctively, 
though  perfectly,  obeyed,  became,  as  He  grew  older, 
the  freely  chosen  rule  of  His  life.  He  not  only  yielded 
to  it  when  made  known  to  Him  ;  in  His  own  pregnant 
phrase,  He  "  sought "  it.  "  I  seek  not  Mine  own  will, 
but  the  will  of  Him  that  sent  Me  "  (S.  John  v.  30)- 
He  thus  ''learned  obedience"  (Hel).  v.  8),  not  because 
He  was  ever  in  any  degree  disobedient,  but  because 
obedience  is  not  fully  obedience  so  long  as  it  is  simply 


Christ^ s  immense  Responsibilities,  191 

a  compliance  with  an  external  command,  but  only  when 
it  can  enter  intelligently  into  the  whole  counsel  of  him 
who  commands.  When,  therefore,  the  life  of  Christ  is 
said  to  be  a  perfect  life,  it  involves  an  appalling  range 
of  intelligent  obedience.  The  humbler  the  position  is, 
the  more  easy  it  is  to  be  perfect.  As  men  rise  in  the 
scale,  the  relations  of  life  become  more  complicated, 
and  responsibilities  more  difficult  to  meet.  And 
Christ's  life  was  beyond  all  comparison  the  most 
complicated  in  its  relations  and  responsibilities  of  all 
that  have  ever  been  lived.  It  was  a  simple  thing  to 
be  a  good  little  child,  a  simple  thing  to  be  a  good 
young  man  at  the  carpenter's  bench  in  Nazareth ; 
but  no  man, — no  emperor  with  all  his  political  and 
social  power  for  good  or  ill,  no  pontiff  with  "  the 
care  of  all  the  Churches  "  weighing  upon  him, — has 
such  a  delicate  and  difficult  task  to  acquit  himself  of 
as  that  of  Jesus.  He  had  all  mankind,  all  history,  to 
think  of ;  and  the  welfare  of  every  individual  human 
being  depended  upon  each  act,  word,  and  thought  of 
His.  He  was  not  called  upon  to  live  the  life  of  a  per- 
fect man  of  one  restricted  type,  but  the  life  of  a  perfect 
Head  of  the  Eace.  And  He  did  it  perfectly.  The 
exacting  eye  of  God  Himself  could  find  nothing  left  to 
desire.  At  no  moment  in  all  that  life  could  a  single 
detail  have  be^en  altered,  except  for  the  worse. 

§  15. 

There  is  one  point  in  our  Lord's  life  of  obedience 
on  which  it  is  necessary  to  enlarge  somewhat  more. 
His  position  was  not  that  of  a  Head  of  the  Race  in  the 


192    Christ's  Obedience  tested  by  Suffering. 


normal  condition  of  the  race.  The  difficulty  of  the 
position  was  aggravated  beyond  our  power  of  thought 
by  the  disordered  state  of  things  into  which  Christ 
came.  The  first  Adam  had  been  tempted,  but  he  had 
not  been  tempted  through  suffering.  Obedience  would 
have  cost  him  nothing  but  self-restraint.  Everything 
was  made  easy  for  him.  But  for  the  Second  Adam 
everything  was  made  hard.  He  "  learned  obedience 
by  the  things  vfhicli  He  suffered"  (Heb.  v.  8).  He 
was  called  upon,  not  only,  like  the  first  man,  to  hold 
back  from  an  abuse  of  endowments,  but  to  endure 
every  variety  of  pain  and  penalty  for  His  adhesion  to 
the  Father  s  will.  The  guiltless  heir  to  the  throne 
of  David  was  born  an  outcast  in  a  stable.  In  early 
infancy,  a  plot  against  His  life  drove  Him  hastily 
into  exile.  In  youth.  He  laboured  at  a  trade,  amidst 
the  privations  of  a  poor  and  bereaved  home.  Then, 
when  He  came  into  public  life,  after  the  fasting  and 
afflictions  of  the  wilderness,  He  became  "  acquainted 
with  grief (Isa.  liii.  8),  in  every  shape  which  it  as- 
sumes. Besides  the  homeless  state,  which  His  own 
words  shew  that  He  felt  acutely — "  The  Son  of  Man 
hath  not  where  to  lay  His  head  "  (S.  Matt.  viii.  20) — 
the  subsistence  on  the  uncertain  charity  of  others,  tlic 
bodily  hunger  and  thirst  and  weariness,  the  heat  and 
cold,  the  loss  of  friends  by  death.  He  had  the  deeper 
sorrows  of  failure  and  rejection,  of  involving  others  in 
His  own  calamities,  of  misunderstanding  and  contempt 
in  His  own  family,  of  furious  hatred  and  cruel  and 
wilful  misinterpretation  from  the  I'cpresentatives  of 
religious  authority,  of  fickle  and  insincere  attachment 


Christ's  Joy  in  Obedience.  193 


on  the  part  of  multitudes  whom  He  had  benefited 
in  soul  and  body,  of  desertion  by  every  one  of  His 
followers,  of  being  sold  by  one  and  denied  with  oaths 
and  curses  by  another,  and  at  last,  as  it  seemed,  of 
being  disowned  and  forsaken  by  God  Himself.  It 
was  not  only  through  innocence,  it  was  not  only 
through  obedience  that  Christ  redeemed  us ;  it  was 
through  obedience  tested  and  perfected  by  sufferings 
so  manifold  in  their  character,  so  ingenious  in  their 
combination,  and  so  overwhelming  in  volume,  that 
no  imagination  short  of  His  could  comprehend  them. 
And  the  glory  of  the  obedience  lies  in  this — that 
Jesus,  so  far  from  flinching  from  doing  the  will  of 
God  at  such  a  cost,  found  joy  and  happiness  and 
contentment  in  doing  it.  Lo,  I  come  (in  the  volume 
of  the  book  it  is  written  of  Me)  to  do  Thy  will,  O  My 
God :  I  am  content  to  do  it,  yea.  Thy  law  is  within 
My  heart "  (Ps.  xl.  7,  8).  "  If  ye  keep  My  command- 
ments, ye  shall  abide  in  My  love ;  even  as  I  have  kept 
My  Father's  commandments,  and  abide  in  His  love. 
These  things  have  I  spoken  unto  you,  that  My  joy 
might  remain  in  you,  and  that  your  joy  might  be 
full "  (S.  John  XV.  10,  11). 

%  16. 

The  obedience  of  our  Lord's  life  was  crowned  by 
the  obedience  of  His  death.  "  Being  found  in  fashion 
as  a  Man,  He  humbled  Himself  and  became  obedient, 
even  to  the  extent  of  death,  yea,  the  death  of  the 
Cross "  (Phil.  ii.  8).  In  one  sense  it  was  the  most 
fitting,  in  another  sense  the  most  unfitting  end  to 

o 


194     Meaning  of  the  Transfiguration. 


such  a  career.  Man,  we  are  given  to  believe,  had  not 
always  been  intended  to  die,  like  the  lower  animals. 
Though  his  terrestrial  life  W8.s  not  designed  to  be 
infinitely  prolonged,  it  was  designed  to  lead  up  to  a 
splendid  departure. 

Such  a  splendid  departure  was  actually,  at  one 
moment,  as  it  seems,  within  the  reach  o£  Jesus.  The 
Transfiguration  was,  we  can  hardly  doubt,  the  begin- 
ning of  that  glorious  passing  away  into  other  con- 
ditions, which  was  the  appropriate  close  of  our  Lord's 
perfect  human  development.  So  far  as  His  own 
personal  probation  was  concerned,  all  had  by  that 
time  been  accomplished,  and  nothing  remained  but 
to  take  the  reward.  Two  saints  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, who  had  themselves  passed  away  by  other  than 
the  ordinary  gates  of  death,  were  seen  appearing,  to 
welcome  Him  as  "  that  which  was  mortal in  Him 
began  to  be  "  swallowed  up  of  life,"  and  He  drew  near 
to  be  "clothed  upon  with  His  habitation  from  heaven" 
(2  Cor.  V.  2,  4).  But  those  who  heard  the  colloquy 
between  our  Lord  and  them,  heard  them,  "  in  glory  " 
themselves,  speak  of  a  different  kind  of  "  exit  (c^oSor) 
which  He  should  accomplish  at  Jerusalem  "  (S.  Luke 
ix.  31).  He  tore  Himself  back  from  the  open  door,  to 
mix  a  wliilc  longer  witli  a  "  faithless  and  perverse 
generation,"  l)idding  His  disciples  to  say  nothing 
al)out  it,  till  He  should  be  "risen  from  the  dead." 
It  was  part  of  His  duty,  as  the  sinless  Head  of  the 
sinful  Race,  to  go  on  as  He  Iiad  begun.  He  had  not 
demanded  exemption  from  the  lesser  sufferings  which 
His  brethren  had  brought  upon  themselves ;  nor  would 


Voluntary  Character  of  Christ^ s  Death.  195 


He  demand,  nor  accept,  exemption  from  the  greatest 
He  had  received  such  a  commandment  from  His 
Father — -to  lay  His  life  down,  and  to  take  it  again 
(S.  John  X.  18)  ;  and  He  did  not  hesitate  to  do  it.  He 
did  not  die  because  He  must,  but  because  He  chose. 

It  was  this  free  renunciation  of  His  right  to  a 
triumphal  end,  prompted  by  love  to  men  and  obedi- 
ence to  the  Father,  which  gave  its  atoning  value  to 
His  death.  "  It  was  not  His  death  which  was  well 
pleasing,''  says  S.  Bernard  in  famous  words,  "  but  the 
will  by  wliich  He  chose  to  die.''  His  death  may  not 
be  isolated  from  His  previous  life.  It  was  a  supreme 
and  concentrated  exhibition  of  that  which  had  all  along 
characterized  Him — -joyful  and  perfect  creaturely 
obedience  under  the  test  of  the  severest  suffering.  - 
The  Apostle  regards  the  whole  life  of  Jesus,  culmina- 
ting in  His  death,  as  a  single  and  undivided  act  of 
righteousness,  all  of  one  piece,  and  far  outbalancing 
by  its  absolute  conformity  to  the  Divine  will  Adam's 
fatal  error.  As  through  one  trespass  the  judgment 
came  unto  all  men  to  condemnation,  even  so  through 
one  act  of  righteousness  (SiKaiwiua)  the  free  gift  came 
unto  all  men  to  justification  of  life  :  for  as  through 
the  one  man's  disobedience  the  many  were  made 
sinners,  even  so  through  the  obedience  of  the  One 
shall  the  many  be  made  righteous"  (Rom.  v.  18,  19). 

§  17. 

Men  often  wonder  why  Jesus  shrank  from  death 
with  such  horror  and  repugnance.  While  a  Socrates 
and  a  Seneca  can  move  towards  death  with  calm 


196    Christ  considered  as  "  tasting'''  Death. 


composure,  Jesus  is  seen  to  be  "  sore  amazed  and  over- 
whelmed with  anguish  (eKOajufiHaOaL  Koi  adr^jULOvdv)'' 
''My  soul,"  He  says,  "is  exceeding  sorrowful,  even 
unto  death "  (S.  Mark  xiv.  33,  34).  It  is  as  though 
He  had  never  fully  felt  till  that  moment  what  death 
would  be,  although  He  had  long  lived  in  contempla- 
tion of  it ;  and  now  it  almost  kills  Him  even  to 
anticipate  it.    Why  was  it  so  ? 

A  striking  phrase  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews 
seems  to  touch  the  point.  Jesus  was  made  "  by  the 
grace  of  God  on  behalf  of  every  man  to  taste  death  " 
(Heb.  ii.  9).  It  has  been  nobly  shewn  by  a  modern 
writer  that  Jesus  alone  of  all  men  has  truly  tasted 
death.  Some  men  are  naturally  stolid  and  apathetic  : 
they  lack  the  imagination  requisite  for  tasting  death. 
Some  purposely  refuse  to  contemplate  what  would 
unman  them,  and  steadily  string  their  nerves  to 
endure  it,  whatever  it  may  be.  To  Christians,  the 
bitterness  of  death  is  gone,  just  because  Christ  died 
and  rose  again  ;  and  they  can  hardly  be  said  to  die  at 
all,  but  to  pass  from  a  less  desirable  scene  of  life  to 
a  more  desirable.  But  when  Christ,  in  His  human 
spirit  and  soul  and  body,  confronted  death,  no  one 
before  Him  had  passed  through  death  victoriously. 
Its  terrors  were  as  yet  undiminished ;  and  Jesus  knew 
that  it  lay  with  Him  to  put  an  end  to  them  by  ex- 
hausting them.  He  was  not  secured  against  those 
terrors  by  any  indifference,  citlier  natural  or  assumed. 
He  refused  the  stupefying  drauglit,  which  was  offered 
Him.  He  resolutely  set  all  His  liuman  faculties  to 
sound  to  the  depths  the  dreadfulncss  of  dying.  80 


special  Horror  of  Crucifixion.  197 


far  from  casting  Himself  upon  His  Divine  impassi- 
bility, He  lent,  we  may  say.  His  Divine  nature  to 
extend  His  human  consciousness  into  an  infinity  of 
suffering.  Not  a  circumstance  was  allowed  to  be 
wanting  which  could  aggravate  the  inherent  horrible- 
ness  of  death. 

Perhaps  the  world  might  liave  been  redeemed,  had 
He  died  for  it  in  Seneca's  comfortable  bath,  or  by 
Socrates  narcotic  poison;  but  S.  Paul  adds  it  as  a 
grave  factor  in  Christ's  obedience,  that  He  was  not 
only  obedient  even  unto  death,  but  that  that  death 
was  nhe  death  of  the  Cross"  (Phil.  ii.  8).  What 
the  Romans,  who  inflicted  it,  thought  of  crucifixion  is 
well  known.  ServitiUis  extremum  smnmumqiie  sup- 
plicium  is  what  Cicero  calls  it ;  and  he  declares  that 
the  Latin  language  contains  no  word  strong  enough 
to  describe  the  crime  of  inflicting  such  a  punishment 
upon  a  Roman  citizen,  however  bad  he  might  be. 
But  to  the  Jew,  who  looked  upon  everything  in 
a  religious  light,  it  was  far  worse.  A  peculiar  sense 
of  malediction  had,  in  a  half  superstitious  manner, 
gathered  about  punishments  of  this  kind,  owing,  or 
partly  owing,  to  the  variously  interpreted  words  of 
the  Law,  "He  that  is  hanged  is  the  curse  of  God" 
(Deut.  xxi.  23).  Any  other  form  of  execution,  even 
stoning  itself,  seemed  kindly,  when  compared  with 
this  hoisting  up  of  the  naked  and  pierced  body 
between  earth  and  heaven,  as  if  rejected  and  abhorred 
by  both.  And  no  element  in  all  this  complication  of 
horrors  passed  untasted  by  Jesus.  The  bodily  tor- 
tures, the  indignities  and  shame,  the  sense  of  failure, 


1 98  Sin  the  Sting  of  Death. 

the  fear,  the  hatred  with  which  His  love  was  requited, 
— all  this,  and  much  more,  was  felt  by  Him  with  a 
sensitiveness  which  has  had  no  parallel,  and  which 
was  able  both  to  analyse  it  into  its  constituent  parts, 
and  to  weigh  it  altogether  in  its  solid  completeness. 
He  drained  the  cup  until  He  had  sucked  out  the  very 
dregs. 

§18. 

The  physical  and  imaginative  terrors  of  death, 
though  acutely  felt  by  our  Lord,  were  a  small  part  of 
His  sufferings  in  dying.  Its  connexion  with  sin  is 
the  "sting"  of  death  (1  Cor.  xv.  66).  Human  death 
is,  as  we  have  said,  an  unnatural  thing.  For  Christ 
to  bear  the  earlier  pains  of  His  life  was  a  great 
condescension,  beca>use  pain  follows  normally  upon 
transgression  of  the  laws  of  the  universe,  not  upon 
perfect  conformity  to  them.  Being  in  a  disordered 
world,  however,  it  was  impossible  that  He  should 
escape  some  pains.  But  that,  after  He  had  cheer- 
fully borne  all  else.  He  should  yield  up  His  life  itself 
as  a  forfeited  thing,  seems  almost  more  than  could 
liave  been  expected.  Christ,  by  His  perfections,  had 
fully  established  His  right  to  live ;  and  God  called 
upon  Him  to  die.  It  was  tantamount  to  demanding 
of  Him  a  confession  of  sin.  Perhaps  this  is  the  light 
in  which  it  is  easiest  for  the  devout  mind  to  lay  hold 
upon  the  Atonement  made  by  Christ. 

If  we  try  to  imagine,  apart  from  revelation,  what 
would  be  the  necessary  elements  in  an  act  of  repara- 
tion for  past  wrong-doing,  we  can  hardly  think  of 


An  Atonement  necessitates  Confession.  199 


anything  else  besides  an  adequately  contrite  acknow- 
ledgment of  it,  coupled  Avith  a  perfect  and  effectual 
resolve  to  do  the  very  opposite  from  tlienceforth. 
Merely  to  cease  from  wrong-doing  in  the  future,  while 
saying  nothing  about  the  past,  would  clearly  be 
insufficient.  But  it  would  as  clearly  be  insufficient, 
if,  even  along  with  the  cessation  of  the  offi3nce,  an 
external  punishment  for  the  past  were  inflicted.  A 
truly  righteous  being  like  God  could  never  be  satisfied 
with  exacting  penalties  which  left  the  mind  of  the 
offender  unaltered.  He  must  needs  require  that  the 
offender  should  come  to  look  upon  his  offence  with 
the  same  eyes  as  Himself.  The  sinner  must  be  brought 
to  regard  the  sin  in  its  true  light,  and  to  measure  it 
with  the  true  measurement.  This  once  fully  done,  it 
is  difficult  to  see  what  more  is  wanting  to  a  satisfactory 
reparation. 

This  is  just  what  the  sinner  is  unable  by  himself 
to  do.  He  cannot  fully  confess  or  feel  his  sin.  The 
sin  itself  impedes  him.  His  eyes  are  blinded  by  it, 
and  his  conscience  benumbed.  He  has  lost  the  ideal 
of  holiness,  and  therefore  cannot  appreciate  the  con- 
trast between  the  ideal  and  the  actual.  None  but  a 
perfectly  healthy  and  pure  conscience  can  adequately 
take  in  the  heinousness  of  sin,  or  adequately  give 
expression  to  it.  But  Christ  could  do  this.  Having 
no  sin  of  His  own  to  dull  His  perceptions.  He  could 
feel  to  the  full  the  demands  of  a  holy  law,  and 
acknowledge  their  unalterable  justice ;  and  therefore 
He  could  gauge  the  extent  to  which  His  brethren  had 
fallen  short.    He  would  be  able  to  give  an  absolute 


200   Christ's  Sympathy  with  the  Divine  W^^athy 


and  unwavering  consent  to  that  wrath  of  God  which 
went  out  against  sin— not  deprecating  it,  not  begging 
that  it  might  be  appeased  with  anything  less  than 
justice,  not  minimising  the  sin  against  which  it  went 
out,  effecting  no  kind  of  composition  with  it,  but  going 
the  whole  length  with  it,  and  sympathizing  with  its 
entire  reach  and  range  of  indignation  atid  fury. 

This  is  involved  in  describing  Jesus  as  a  "faith- 
ful" High  Priest  (Heb.  ii.  17;  iii.  2),  a  "righteous'' 
Advocate  (1  John  ii.  1).  Such  a  complete  and 
exhaustive  concurrence  in  the  Father's  judgment 
upon  sin  is  even  spoken  of  as  sustaining  our  Saviour 
through  the  anguish  of  His  task.  He  was  taking, 
not  only  giving,  revenge  for  the  outrage  done  by  sin. 
"  The  day  of  vengeance  is  in  My  heart,  and  the  year 
of  My  redeemed  is  come.  And  I  looked,  and  there 
was  none  to  help  " — not  one  who  was  able  to  take  the 
same  view  of  sin  as  He  took — "  and  I  wondered  that 
there  was  none  to  uphold ;  therefore  Mine  own  arm 
brought  salvation  unto  Me;  and  My  fury,  it  upheld 
Me  "  (Isa.  Ixiii.  4,  5).  But  it  was  not  the  fury  of  one 
who  assented  to  the  chastisement  of  some  guilty  third 
person.  The  wrath  of  which  He  so  deeply  felt  the 
justice  blazed  forth  upon  Himself.  It  was  this  which 
gave  it  so  terrible  a  power.  On  Him  was  laid  "the 
iniquity  of  us  all "  (Isa.  liii.  6).  He  felt  Himself  to 
be  identified  with  His  brethren  for  weal  and  for  woe. 
Though  it  was  no  fault  of  His  that  they  had  sinned. 
He  was  in  a  manner  lield  responsible  for  them.  Their 
shame  was  His  sliame,  their  guilt  His  guilt.  Stand- 
ing to  them  in  the  relation  in  which  He  stood,  He 


and  with  the  Shame  of  His  Brethren.  201 


could  not  disown  them;  and  He  would  not  if  He 
could.  He  loved  them  too  well  for  that.  He  had 
espoused  their  cause  because  He  loved  them,  and 
therefore  He  must  suffer  with  them  and  for  them 
And  if  His  work  was  to  be  well  and  lastingly  done,  so 
as  to  need  no  repetition  and  no  supplementing.  He 
must,  once  for  all,  taste  the  whole  bitterness  of  sin, 
even  of  the  sin  of  all  mankind.  He  must,  as  repre- 
senting the  conscience  of  the  race,  feel  a  loving,  filial 
submissive  sorrow  for  sin,  which  should  not  only  be 
sincere  and  good  as  far  as  it  went,  but  which  should 
cover  the  whole  field  which  had  to  be  covered.  It 
was  His  lot  to  realise  to  the  utmost  item  in  His  own 
Person  all  that  each .  individual  conscience  ought 
to  realise  when  it  is  piercingly  awakened  to  the 
righteous  claims  of  God  on  the  one  side,  and  to 
the  base  selfishness  with  which  it  has  met  them  on 
the  other.  And  if  such  an  awakening  is  bitter  to  the 
guilty  conscience,  how  much  more  to  the  sinless ! 
Often  a  pure-hearted  mother  will  feel  the  disgrace  and 
wickedness  of  her  son  more  profoundly  than  the  son 
himself  does  even  in  his  most  contrite  moments.  In 
something  of  the  same  way, — though  mother  and  son 
are  not  to  each  other  what  Christ  is  to  those  whom 
He  died  to  save, — Christ,  we  may  believe,  felt  the 
torture  more  deeply  than  the  whole  world  of  penitents 
could  feel  it,  when  the  iniquity  of  all  men  was  borne 
in  upon  His  pure  human  conscience — not  indeed  as 
His  own,  as  if  He  had  personally  committed  it, — but 
as  more  than  His  own,  because  it  was  the  iniquity 
of  those  whom  He  so  loved,  and  with  whom  His  love 


202 


Otir  Sins  laid  tipon  Christ. 


so  identified  Him.  There  is  a  kind  of  selfishness  in 
penitence  for  sins  which  we  have  committed  with  our 
own  hands,  but  none  in  such  a  penitence  as  this,  where 
love  for  the  offender  and  love  for  the  Oftended,  in  all 
their  combined  force,  were  converted  into  an  agonized 
sense  of  the  offence. 

And  this  was  not  to  be  done  by  an  act  of  contem- 
plation only.  All  through  life  Christ  had  been  made 
to  bear  the  loathsome  pressure  of  other  men's  sins 
encompassing  Him.  But  during  all  that  time  He 
stood  in  some  measure  aloof  from  them  ;  they  were 
kept,  so  to  speak,  at  arm's  length,  and  regarded  as 
external  to  Himself, — the  sins  of  others.  It  was  His 
death  which  made  the  union  with  men  complete.  In 
His  death,  those  sins,  from  which  every  fibre  of  His 
being  revolted  with  indignation  and  dismay,  were 
Ijrought  home  to  His  inmost  conscience,  in  the  realisa- 
tion that  He  and  we  are  one.  It  was  not  for  Him  to 
plead  calmly  and  condescendingly  for  us  from  His 
superior  height  of  conscious  integrity,  but  to  appro- 
pricite  us  and  all  our  vileness,  in  order  to  deal  with  it 
as  it  deserved  within  the  very  sphere  of  His  OAvn  holy 
being.  The  last  barrier  between  His  Person  and  ours 
was  borne  down  in  death,  and  let  in  upon  His  soul 
the  wliole  flood  of  our  transgression,  to  be  expiated 
and  purged  and  done  away  by  the  satisfactory 
tlioroughness  with  Vv^hich  Christ's  broken  heart  ad- 
mitted it,  grieved  over  it,  and  repudiated  it.  In  sucli 
a  death,  voluntarily  accepted,  Clu'ist  made  the  faithful 
response  of  the  human  conscience  in  view  of  the 
broken  law  of  God. 


Christ's  Death,  in  what  Sense  penaL  203 


§  19. 

That  Christ's  death  was  in  a  true  sense  penal,  is 
clearly  conveyed  to  us  in  Holy  Scripture,  though  it 
has  been  denied  by  pious  and  tender  souls  of  our  own 
time.  The  chastisement  of  our  peace  was  upon 
Him"  (Isa.  liii.  5).  But  when  it  is  asked  what  the 
penalty  was,  the  answer  must  be  sought  in  some  such 
considerations  as  the  foregoing,  not  in  anything  more 
outward  and  adventitious.  It  was  the  death  itself 
which  formed  the  penalty — only  death  realised  and 
tasted.  Christ  did  not  bear  our  sins  in  addition  to 
dying,  or  die  in  addition  to  bearing  our  sins.  His 
death — Christ  being  what  He  was,  and  feeling  it  as 
He  did — was  itself  the  bearing  of  our  sins.  Tlius 
the  naturalness  and  simplicity  of  the  Atonement  are 
preserved. 

But  there  was  one  feature  in  Christ's  Passion 
which  deserves  a  separate  mention,  because  it  wears 
most  clearly  the  penal  aspect,  although  strictly  it  was 
an  integral  part  of  His  "tasting  death."  The  sins 
which  He  bore  were  so  completely  laid  on  Him,  as  to 
produce  upon  His  personal  consciousness  the  sense  of 
being  Himself  cut  off  from  God.  My  God,  my  God," 
He  cried,  in  the  words  of  the  Psalm,  why  didst  Thou 
forsake  Me  ? "  It  was  the  hour  in  which  the  Son's 
"  self -emptying,"  spoken  of  by  S.  Paul  as  begun  in 
the  Incarnation  (Phil.  ii.  7),  was  consummated.  Non 
solvit  nnionem,  says  S.  Leo,  sed  subtraxit  visionem. 
The  Divine  fellowship  between  the  Father  and  the 
Son  was  not  annulled,  but  for  the  time,  it  was  not 


204 


Mystery  of  the  Dereliction. 


actively  enjoyed.  It  was  Christ's  own  will  and  the 
Father  s  that  it  should  be  so.  His  Godhead  seemed 
to  retreat  and  withdraw  itself  into  His  manhood,  so 
that  there  might  be  no  alleviation  to  the  anguish 
which  the  manhood  felt,  and  which  the  Godhead 
alone  enabled  it  fully  to  feel.  It  was  made  to  bear 
the  weight  in  absolute  isolation.  No  human  sym- 
pathy reached  it  from  below  the  Cross,  and  no  Divine 
sympathy  from  above.  That  heart  which  was  dis- 
tended, even  to  bursting,  with  entire  love  to  both,  had 
to  endure  the  sense  of  estrangement  from  both,  as  if 
all  sin  were  concentrated  in  His  own  Person,  and 
were  abhorred  and  disowned  by  God  and  man  alike. 
And  the  sense  of  estrangement  from  God  is  the 
greatest  pain  that  can  be  conceived  of.  Even  to  feel 
the  active  exercise  of  His  wrath,  as  when  it  says, 
"Upon  the  ungodly  He  shall  rain  snares,  fire  and 
brimstone,  storm  and  tempest ;  this  shall  be  their 
portion  to  drink (Ps.  xi.  6) — this  would  be  a  lesser 
thing  to  bear,  especially  to  a  holy  soul,  than  the 
freezing  sense  of  a  calm,  deliberate,  inexorable  aban- 
donment. Indignant  punishment  is  a  sign  of  love 
that  is  pained  ;  but  forsaking  shews  only  aversion 
and  dislike.  The  transport  of  anger  might  spend 
itself  and  subside ;  but  there  is  a  hopelessness  about 
God's  judicial  dereliction  of  the  soul  which  gives  it 
the  appearance  of  being  eternal  and  irreversible.  If 
S.  Paul's  description  of  the  penalty  of  the  lost  is 
exact,  "  eternal  perisliing  from  tlie  face  of  the  Lord  " 
(2  Thess.  i.  9),  tlien  it  seems  as  if  our  Blessed  Lord 
liad  even  tasted  something  not  unlike  it  uj)on  the 


Stibstitution  not  the  Scripture  Doctrine.  205 


Cross.  It  was  not,  of  course,  the  case  that  the  Father 
had  rejected  Him,  or  was  personally  wroth  with 
Jesus ;  nor  did  He  feign  to  do  so ;  but  man  was 
under  condemnation,  and  must  be  made  to  realise 
what  really  the  condemnation  was ;  and  J esus  was 
man,  and  could  alone  realise  for  us  the  extent,  and 
the  righteousness,  of  the  condemnation.  So  it  was 
brought  home  to  Him  in  dying  that  He  was  perfectly 
identified  with  us.  Our  sins  rolled  like  an  ocean 
between  Him  and  God,  and  out  of  the  deep  of  it  He 
cried, "  My  God,  My  God,  why  didst  Thou  forsake  Me  ? " 

§  20. 

It  will  be  seen  that,  on  this  view  of  the  Atonement, 
there  is  no  need  to  resort  to  the  language  of  substitu- 
tion, which  has  so  often  alienated  thoughtful  minds. 
That  language  is  neither  scriptural  nor  ancient,  and 
therefore  has  no  special  claim  upon  the  adhesion 
of  the  Christian  conscience.  Indeed,  it  seems  to  be 
studiedly  excluded  from  the  New  Testament.  There 
is  but  a  single  saying  of  our  Lord's  which  appears  to 
teach  it,  where  He  says,  "  The  Son  of  Man  came  not 
to  be  ministered  unto,  but  to  minister,  and  to  give 
His  soul  a  ransom  instead  of  many  "  (S.  Matt.  xx.  28 ; 
S.  Mark  x.  45).  But  the  preposition  which  is  here 
used,  and  only  here  (avri),  belongs  to  the  notion  of 
ransom."  It  cannot  now  be  doubted  that  the  notion 
of  "  ransom "  in  this  connexion  is  metaphorical,  and 
must  not  be  pressed  into  a  dogma.  To  accept  it 
literally  would  involve  us  in  the  question  whether 
the  ransom  was  paid  to  God  or  (according  to  some 


2o6    The  metaphorical  Idea  of  Ransofit. 

early  exponents)  to  the  devil.  If  we  adopted  the 
former  alternative,  it  would  involve  us  in  the  further 
question — what  ransom  Christ  paid  instead  of  us,  so 
that  we  need  not  pay  it.  Not  bodily  death,  for  we 
all  die ;  not  eternal  damnation,  for  (if  it  is  not  blas- 
phemous even  to  deny  such  a  thought)  Christ  was  not 
eternally  damned.  But  as  a  fact,  the  very  idea  of 
ransom  is  not  strongly  felt  in  the  metaphor.  In  the 
New  Testament  itself,  Moses  is  spoken  of  as  sent  to 
be  "  a  ransomer (Acts  vii.  35)  of  the  Israelites.  The 
word  is  the  same ;  but  no  one  would  maintain  that 
anything  was  paid  by  Moses  for  the  deliverance  of 
the  people.  Therefore  it  would  not  be  true  to  say 
that  the  statement,  Christ  gave  His  soul  a  ransom 
instead  of  many/'  is  the  same  as  Christ  died  instead 
of  many."  The  preposition  is  a  part  of  the  metaphor. 
And  as  if  to  take  away  any  occasion  of  misunder- 
standing, S.  Paul,  when  citing  our  Lord's  expression, 
alters  the  form  of  it :  Who  gave  Himself  a  ransom 
on  behalf  of  all  (dvTiXvrpov  vrrip  iravThyv)  "  (1  Tim.  ii. 
6).  He  exchanges  the  unusual  preposition,  which 
would  denote  a  substitution,  for  the  usual  one,  which 
denotes  simply  an  action  in  another's  cause. 

So  far,  therefore,  as  the  language  of  the  New 
Testament  goes,  there  is  no  reason  for  supposing  our 
Lord  to  have  been  substituted  for  us  in  His  Passion. 
But  the  objection  to  a  tlieory  of  atonement  by  substi- 
tution lies  deeper  than  the  meaning  of  a  preposition. 
If  the  one  object  of  tlic  Divine  justice  liad  been  to 
inflict  a  condign  punisliment,  perhaps  tlie  theory 
might  have  been  more  tolerable.    But  we  have  seen 


Judicial  Stibstitution  impossible,  207 


that  such  was  not  the  case,  and  that  an  equivalent 
penalty  could  not  satisfy  God,  instead  of  the  removal 
of  the  sin.  Even  had  it  been  otherwise,  however,  it 
runs  counter  to  all  our  best  conceptions  of  justice  that 
penalties  should  be  inflicted  in  that  fashion.  We  can 
understand  a  just  penalty  being  remitted  to  the 
offender  at  the  intercession  of  a  powerful  friend.  We 
can  understand  such  a  friend  undertaking  any  pains 
and  dangers,  any  obloquy  and  humiliation,  the  loss 
of  his  property,  the  loss  of  life  itself,  in  promoting 
the  cause  which  he  has  espoused.  The  greater  his 
self-sacrifice,  the  more  powerful  will  his  intercession 
be.  The  whole  world,  both  of  nature  and  of  men, 
teems  with  sufferings  which  are  in  that  sense  vi- 
carious, as  borne  by  one  for  the  sake  of  another. 
They  constantly  move  our  compassion  and  our  ad- 
miration. There  is  nothing  contrary  to  our  feelings, 
if  such  self-sacrifices,  perhaps  of  a  wife  or  of  a  father, 
are  taken  into  account,  and  the  penalty  of  the  offender 
is  mitigated  in  consequence;  especially  if  there  are 
signs  that  the  offender  himself  is  moved  to  amend- 
ment by  the  love  displayed  on  his  behalf.  But  that 
a  legal  tribunal,  professing  to  act  on  principles  of 
strict  justice,  and  to  visit  specified  offences  with  fixed 
penalties,  should  accept  the  offer  of  an  innocent  party 
to  undergo  the  penalty  in  the  stead  of  the  guilty, 
would  be  totally  impossible. 

But,  indeed,  such  vicarious  sufferings  as  we  have 
spoken  of  point  us,  not  to  the  thought  of  a  legalised 
substitution,  but  to  that  of  something  far  deeper. 
They  serve  as  types  of  the  Atonement  made  by 


2o8     Atoneme^tt  by  Union  with  Man, 


Christ  just  because  they  shew  the  union,  the  solidarity, 
existing  throughout  the  world,  and  (in  all  the  more 
marked  examples)  because  they  shew  love  as  the 
great  bond  of  union.  There  is  no  bare  substitution ; 
there  is  vital  connexion,  free  and  sympathetic  identi- 
fication. Such  is  the  position  of  our  Redeemer  in  the 
world.  He  cannot  be  substituted  for  man;  He  is 
Man.  One  thing  cannot  be  put  in  the  stead  of 
another  unless  it  distinctly  is  another.  But  our  Lord 
is  not  another.  He  has  made  Himself  one  with  us. 
He  has  gathered  us  up  into  Himself.  His  love  binds 
each  one  of  us  to  Him  so  closely  that  He  does  not 
feel  Himself  to  be  apart  from  us.  The  difference  of 
person,  indeed,  remains,  or  there  would  be  no  re- 
ciprocity of  love ;  but  He  is  "  consubstantial  with  us," 
even  as  He  is  with  the  Father.  In  the  completeness 
of  the  union  which  His  mercy  has  effected  with  us, 
all  tliat  is  ours  has  become  His — our  sin  included; 
and  all  that  is  His  has  become  ours — even  that  right- 
eousness which  swallowed  up  and  expiated  our  sin. 
On  our  behalf  He  sufiered,  but  not  in  our  stead ;  and 
He  undertook  for  us  that  Ave  too  should  suffer,  that 
we  should  share  His  mind  about  sin,  and  should  abhor 
ourselves  for  it,  and  die  to  it,  as  He  died.  He  made 
Himself  "  a  Surety  "  (Heb.  vii.  22)  for  us,  laying  down 
His  own  life  as  a  pledge  that  we,  by  faith,  should  one 
day  become  like  Him. 

§  21. 

Tins  consideration  of  the  Saviours  Person  gives 
a  majestic  unity  and  consistency  to  the  whole  doctrine 


Naturalness  of  the  Doctrine.  209 


of  the  Atonement,  and  makes  it  appear,  not  a  strained 
and  artificial  transaction,  but  natural  and  simple,  and 
in  harmony  with  what  we  know  and  with  what  we 
feel.  It  is  just  in  itself,  and  becoming  to  God.  The 
Divine  purpose  is  not  allowed  to  be  thwarted;  the 
very  obstacles  placed  in  its  way  are  made  the  trophies 
of  its  power.  Evil  is  not  overborne  by  violence; 
there  is  so  much  of  truth  in  the  old  notion  of  the 
devil  being  fairly  treated;  it  is  conquered  by  moral 
means,  by  love  entering  unarmed  upon  the  combat, 
and  inspiring  the  sinful  race  with  a  new  determina- 
tion to  be  holy.  Though  God  is  the  author  of  the 
Atonement,  and  without  Him  fallen  humanity  would 
have  been  unable  to  offer  it,  yet  it  was  made  by  Man, 
acting  in  the  true  conditions  of  man's  nature.  Full 
reparation  is  made  for  all  that  has  been  done  wrong, 
and  security  is  given  for  the  ultimate  extirpation  of 
the  sinful  principles. 

And  yet,  however  we  may  labour  to  set  forth  in 
human  words  the  nature  and  character  of  the  Atone- 
ment, it  is  certain  that  no  complete  account  of  it  can 
be  given.  It  is  too  far-reaching  for  our  understanding. 
We  are,  no  doubt,  intended  to  inquire  about  it,  to 
dispel  false  notions  about  it,  to  bring  together  facts 
which  throw  light  upon  it.  But  there  is  a  danger  in 
doing  so,  lest  men  should  rest  in  a  theory  of  redemp- 
tion rather  than  on  the  fact  itself.  We  are  not  saved 
by  what  we  think  about  the  Cross  of  Christ,  but  by 
the  Cross  itself.  It  is  of  great  importance  that  we 
should  adoringly  ask  of  our  Lord  the  meaning  of  His 
Passion;  but  those  who  understand  least  of  it  as  a 

p 


210    The  Atonement  a  Fact,  not  a  Theory. 


system  of  philosophy  are  often  those  who  best  know 
its  power  by  experience.  Calvary  is  not  in  the  first 
instance  a  school  for  theologians,  but  a  refuge  for 
penitents;  and  S.  Paul  tells  us  that  he  deliberately 
refused,  at  least  on  one  scene  of  his  labours,  to  set 
forth  the  Atonement  as  a  doctrine,  lest  it  should  lose 
force  as  a  historical  action.  ''Christ  sent  me  to  preach 
the  Gospel,"  he  says ;  and  he  adds,  not  in  wisdom  of 
words,  that  the  Cross  of  Christ  should  not  be  emptied  " 
(1  Cor.  i.  17). 


Chapter  VI L 


mje  iMm  aorD  auD  tje  fflift  of  tjc  Spirit* 

Effects  of  Death  upon  Chrisfs  Spirit  and  Body — His  Rcstwrection  and 
Ascensioji — Nezv  Work  of  the  Risen  Lord,  in  Intercession,  and  iit 
the  gift  of  the  Spirit — Person  and  Procession  of  the  Holy  Ghost— 
His  relation  to  the  Htwian  Nature  of  our  Lord — Characteristic 
Function  of  the  Spirit  in  the  World — Difference  between  His  WorJz 
before  the  Incarnatioji  and  since— Birth  and  Illumination  of  the 
Church — The  Church  ChrisCs  Visible  Embodiment — The  Com- 
munion of  Saints. 

%  1- 

Our  Lord's  death  was  a  real  and  complete  death :  He 
"became  dead"  (Rev.  i.  IS),  and  remained  so,  according 
to  Jewish  modes  of  counting,  for  three  days.  During 
that  time.  He  did  not  return  to  heaven  and  His  Father 
(S.  John  XX.  17).  He  condescended  to  endure  all  the 
limitations  which  are  essential  to  the  state  of  death. 
The  Apostles'  Creed,  in  its  latest  form,  follows  out 
that  thought  in  its  twofold  consequences,  for  body  and 
for  soul.  He  was  dead,  and  buried :  He  descended 
into  hell."  It  is  commonly  said  that  our  Lord's 
Divinity  was  not  withdrawn  from  either  part  of  His 
human  constitution.  This  may  be  implied  by  the 
way  in  which  both  the  Creed  and  the  Scriptures  still 
identify  each  of  the  separated  parts  with  Himself, 


212  Christ^ s  Descent  into  Hell. 


His  body  is  still  in  a  sense  He,  and  so  is  His  spirit. 

There  laid  they  Jesus  "  (S.  John  xix.  42),  is  as  true 
a  statement  as  that  neither  was  He  left  in  Hades  " 
(Acts  ii.  31).  I£  we  do  not  believe  that  He  was  in 
this  way  really  and  truly  dead,  we  lose  the  significance 
of  His  Resurrection. 

But  death  did  not  benumb  and  paralyse  His 
spiritual  faculties.    On  the  contrary,  by  it  He  was 

quickened  in  spirit"  (1  Pet.  iii.  18),  so  as  to  be  able 
to  perform  a  work  of  mercy  and  power.  Stripped  of 
the  bodily  integument,  but  still  invested  with  His 
human  spirit,  "  He  went  and  preached  to  the  spirits 
in  prison"  (1  Pet.  iii.  19).  Not  only  did  He  vouch- 
safe the  blessing  of  His  company  to  the  faithful  dead 
in  Paradise  (S.  Luke  xxiii.  43),  but,  according  to  S. 
Peter,  He  penetrated — assuredly  not  Himself  to  suffer 
there  any  more — into  the  place  or  state  where  some 
at  least  were  confined  who  had  died  an  apparently 
impenitent  death  by  the  visitation  of  God.  What 
was  the  exact  purport  and  effect  of  His  activity  among 
them  we  are  not  told,  but  only  that  He  preached 
to  them,  a  "  gospel "  (1  Pet.  iv.  G).  The  power  of  His 
Passion  was  already  being  felt  in  the  unseen  world, 
even  before  His  Resurrection. 

And  in  like  manner  His  dead  bodj^,  in  the  world 
of  sense,  gave  signs  of  what  was  to  come.  The  wound 
which  was  inflicted  by  the  soldier's  spear,  was  only 
given  because  the  body  was  "  dead  already ; "  and 
if  it  liad  not  been  dead,  the  wound  would  liave  caused 
death.  But,  as  Professor  Wcstcott  has  pointed  out, 
the  "  blood  and  water  "  whicli  issued  from  the  wound 


Effect  of  Death  on  Christ's  Body.  213 


were  not  a  sign  of  death.  Blood  does  not  readily  flow 
from  an  ordinary  corpse.  The  separation  of  the  blood 
and  the  water,  or  seritm,  which  takes  place  in  such  a 
rupture  of  the  heart  as  our  Lord  is  thought  by  some 
to  have  died  of,  would  be  the  beginning  of  decomposi- 
tion and  corruption ;  and  the  sinless  flesh  of  J esus, 
though  subject  to  death,  was  not  to  be  subject  to  cor- 
ruption (Acts  ii.  31).  We  ought,  therefore,  rather  to  see, 
in  the  outpouring  of  the  blood  and  water,  a  sign  that 
the  dead  body  of  Christ  was  being  prepared  for  the 
coming  Resurrection.  And  more  than  this.  What 
the  soldiers  did,  and  what  they  did  not  do,  were  alike 
full  of  symbolical  import.  Unconscious  of  the  signifi- 
cance of  their  own  action,  they  were  providentially 
guided  to  a  double  fulfilment  of  prophecy,  and  set 
forth  mystically  the  method  which  redemption  was 
about  to  follow.  The  unviolated  frame,  which  had 
been  typified  by  the  Paschal  Lamb,  of  which  not  a 
bone  was  to  be  broken,  taught  the  undivided  unity  of 
the  Church  which  was  to  be :  and  the  pierced  side,  with 
its  twofold  out-flow,  expressed  the  communication  of 
her  Bridegroom's  life  to  that  Church, — the  blood  a  true 
fountain  for  her  sin,  and  the  water  for  her  unclean- 
ness, — which  gifts  were  to  be  conveyed  to  her  until  the 
end  of  the  age  in  the  two  Gospel  Sacraments  (S.  John 
xix.  32-37 ;  with  Ex.  xii.  46 ;  Zech.  xii.  10 ;  xiii.  1). 

§2. 

It  does  not  enter  into  our  present  scope  to  examine 
the  historical  evidence  for  the  fact  of  our  Lord's 
resurrection,  but  to  show  its  doctrinal  significance* 


2  14        Reality  of  His  Resttrredion. 


The  importance  of  the  fact  is  so  great,  that  the  whole 
structure  of  the  Church,  and  the  whole  hope  and  belief 
of  Christians,  rests  upon  it.  "  If  Christ  hath  not  been 
raised,"  says  S.  Paul,  "then  is  our  preaching  vain, 
your  faith  also  is  vain  "  (1  Cor.  xv.  14).  He  goes  on 
to  speak  of  the  whole  Apostolic  message  as  a  grave 
misrepresentation  of  the  character  of  God,  if  it  should 
be  found  that  the  Eesurrection  never  took  place.  It 
is  therefore  of  much  consequence  that  the  nature  of 
the  resurrection  of  Christ  should  be  rightly  appre- 
hended. 

The  Church  cannot  be  satisfied  with  the  theory 
which,  under  various  forms,  has  of  late  years  appeared 
to  some  minds  a  sufficient  account  of  the  matter, — 
namely,  that  the  personality  of  Jesus  had  so  wrought 
upon  His  disciples,  that  after  His  death  they  could 
not  resist  the  impression  that  He  was  spiritually  alive 
and  near  them,  and  that  they  saw  visions  of  Him, — 
whether  as  the  natural  result  of  their  exalted  state  of 
feeling  with  regard  to  Him,  or  by  the  special  inter- 
position of  God.  It  is  enough  to  say  that  the  evidence 
which  we  have  is  not  of  such  a  character.  What  the 
disciples  experienced  was  not  a  subjective  impression, 
liowcver  spiritually  correct, — except  in  the  same  sense 
as  all  our  physical  perceptions  are  subjective.  They 
saw,  not  a  ghost,  but  a  body,  Avhich  they  handled,  and 
felt  it  to  be  built  up  of  flesh  and  bones, — which 
uttered  words, — which  assimilated  the  food  they 
offered  to  it, — which  at  frequent  intervals  during  six 
weeks  presented  itself  to  them,  when  assembled,  as 
well  as  to  single  persons,  and  remained  with  them  in 


Christ  rose  to  a  New  Life.  215 


conferences  of  long  duration.  The  resurrection  of 
our  Lord  brought  Him  back  into  a  living  relation  with 
material  and  palpable  things. 

But  on  the  other  hand  it  would  be  as  gross  a 
depravation — to  say  the  least  of  it — of  the  Gospel 
teaching,  to  suppose  that  our  Lord's  resurrection 
was  a  return  to  the  na^tural  and  earthly  conditions 
to  which  He  was  before  subject.  The  nature  of  the 
spiritual  body  "  is  a  matter  which  we  shall  have  to 
consider  hereafter.  SufSce  it  to  say  here,  that  the 
resurrection  of  our  Lord  Vv^as  not  merely  a  proof  of 
His  continued  existence,  nor  merely  a  proof  of  His 
being  indeed  the  Son  of  God,  nor  merely  a  proof  of 
the  success  and  acceptance  of  His  atoning  death,  but 
it  was  a  revelation,  and  a  most  unexpected  revelation, 
of  the  nature  of  the  ncAV  life.  It  was  clearly  seen  that 
the  new  life  is  not  a  simple  continuation  of  this, — • 
like  the  life  to  which  Lazarus  or  the  child  of  Jairus 
returned, — but  something  far  higher. 

Nor  was  the  resurrection  of  our  Lord  only  an 
Exhibition  for  our  benefit.  By  it  Jesus  Christ  Him- 
self went  through  a  distinct  change  in  the  mode  of 
His  human  existence.  It  would  not  have  been  a  true 
revelation  to  us,  if  this  were  not  the  case ;  it  would 
have  been  only  a  feint,  like  the  Docetist  notion  of 
the  Incarnation.  Our  Lord's  own  Person  reached  a 
further  point  by  it ;  and  He  gained  through  death 
that  spiritual  condition  into  which  He  had  looked  at 
His  Transfiguration. 

But  even  in  risino;  ao^ain  from  the  dead,  our  Lord 
had  not  attained  the  full  reward  of  His  life's  work  and 


2i6  Nature  of  the  Ascension. 


His  death  s  merit.  For  our  sakes  He  allowed  Himself 
to  be  for  forty  days  detained  on  His  heavenward  way, 
— in  an  exalted  state  indeed, — possibly  in  one  of 
gradually  advancing  glory — but  not  in  that  of  His 
final  exaltation.  The  Ascension  was  needed  to  com- 
plete what  the  Resurrection  began.  By  it  He  passed, 
not  only  into  a  spiritual,  but  into  a  glorified  condition. 
It  was  the  great  resumption  of  everything  which  in 
His  "  self-emptying  "  He  had  laid  aside.  He  entered 
once  more  upon  the  full  enjoyment  of  all  His  Divine 
glories  and  prerogatives.  Every  humiliating  restric- 
tion and  limitation  was  for  ever  at  an  end.  In  the 
figurative  language  of  Scripture  He  once  more  "  sat 
down  on  the  right  hand  of  God''  (Heb.  x.  12).  He 
sat  down  Incarnate,  not,  as  before  the  Incarnation, 
in  His  Divine  nature  alone :  but  He  sat  down  en- 
riched by  the  nature  which  He  had  assumed,  not 
clogged  and  impoverished  and  weakened  by  it  any 
more.  The  humanity  which  He  wore  was  in  no  way 
annulled  or  dehumanised,  though  the  conditions  under 
which  it  acts  are  to  our  present  faculties  inconceivable. 
Every  constituent  of  our  nature  is  still  there,  and 
still  truly  human,  only  carried  into  the  highest  per- 
fection of  which  it  is  capable,  and  answering  with 
ease  and  readiness  to  every  demand  which  is  made 
upon  it  by  that  adored  Person  whose  it  is. 

That  perfection  it  will  not  leave  when  our  Lord 
reappears  upon  the  scene  of  tliis  lower  world  in  His 
Second  Advent.  Tlie  Second  Advent  will  not,  like 
the  first,  involve  a  change  in  the  conditions  of  His 
personal  life, — at  least  not  in  the  direction  of  con- 


Effects  of  Christ's  Resttrrection.  217 


descension.  We  expect  Him  to  become  visible  again, 
not  to  the  eye  o£  faith  only,  but  to  that  of  unbelief 
also  (Rev.  i.  7) ;  but  He  will  be  seen  in  glory,  not  in 
weakness  any  more.  It  will  be  by  removing  the  veil 
from  men's  eyes,  so  that  they  may  see  Him  as  He  is, 
not  by  His  accommodating  Himself  to  them  again 
and  appearing  outside  the  veil. 

§  3. 

It  is  the  doctrine  of  our  Lord  that  not  until  after 
His  death  and  resurrection  was  He  in  a  position  to 
begin  the  actual  regeneration  of  the  world.  "  Except 
the  corn  of  wheat  fall  into  the  ground  and  die,"  He 
said,  "  it  abideth  itself  alone  "  (S.  John  xii.  24).  Until 
that  epoch,  He  was  Himself  only  on  the  natural  level, 
so  far  as  His  human  nature  was  concerned.  His 
death  became  the  occasion  of  exercising  a  ncAv  power 
upon  mankind.  It  was  not  only  that  by  the  Atone- 
ment made  in  His  death  He  removed  the  obstacles 
which  hindered  God's  grace  from  flowing  freely  out 
upon  us.  Nor  was  it  only,  on  the  other  hand,  that 
the  pathetic  story  of  His  death  touched  the  hearts  of 
men,  and  made  them  susceptible  to  better  influences. 
In  other  words,  it  was  not  His  death,  as  death  only, 
which  made  the  difference  to  the  world,  but  His  death 
as  the  indispensable  mode  of  entrance  upon  a  new 
vantage-ground, — the  gate  to  the  Resurrection.  If 
we  are  saved  at  the  present  time, — if  the  centuries 
since  Christ's  life  on  earth  are  of  a  loftier  character 
than  those  before,  it  is  due,  not  to  the  simple  action 
upon  us  of  a  past  event — even  the  greatest — in  the 


2i8         His  Intercession  in  Heaven. 


history  of  Christ ;  it  is  due  to  Christ  Himself,  in  His 
continued  and  heightened  activity,  still  living  to 
apply  to  us  the  results  of  that  event.  It  was  this 
which  made  Him  in  an  effectual  sense  the  Second 
Adam,  and  rendered  Him  capable  of  imparting  to 
other  men  a  new  life.  By  His  death  and  resurrection 
He  became,  not  Avhat  the  first  Adam  was,  a  living 
soul,"  but  much  more,  "  a  quickening  spirit "  (1  Cor. 
XV.  45); — a  Second  Adam  not  only  as  once  more 
recapitulating  and  representing  the  race,  but  as  an 
actual  father  to  it,  reproducing  His  own  life  in  it, — 
and  that,  not  a  life  "  of  the  ground,  earthy,"  but  "  of 
heaven  "  (1  Cor.  xv.  47). 

There  are  two  closely  connected  ways  by  which 
Christ  after  His  glorification  began  a  new  work  for 
mankind,  the  one  inward,  towards  God;  the  other 
outward,  towards  the  world.  The  first  is  the  exercise 
of  an  immeasurably  increased  power  of  intercession. 
In  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  we  appear  to  be  given 
to  understand  that  so  far  from  having  accomplished 
and  laid  aside  His  priestly  function  with  His  death, 
our  Lord  was  first  truly  consecrated  to  His  priest- 
hood on  the  morning  of  the  Resurrection  (Heb.  v.  5,  6). 
The  sacrificial  task  was  not  at  an  end  when  His  life 
was  laid  down  on  Calvary, — which  answered  to  the 
slaughter  of  the  typical  victims.  The  whole  point  of 
the  sacrifice  lies  in  the  presentation  of  that  life, 
enriched  and  consecrated  to  the  utmost  by  having 
undergone  death,  and  still  and  for  ever  living,  in  the 
inmost  presence  of  God.  Tliis  was  expressed  in  the 
Jewish  ritual  by  the  sprinkling  of  the  blood  upon 


His  Gift  of  the  Spirit.  2 1 9 


the  mercy  seat  (Heb.  ix.  12,  24).  Christ  then  has 
passed  withm  the  veil,  to  complete  His  merciful  work 
for  men,  ty  pleading  for  them,  not  as  in  the  weak  life 
of  ea^rth,  but  ''in  heaven  itself,"  appearing  for  them 
"  in  the  presence  of  God," — and  by  pleading  for  them 
in  the  irresistible  power  v^hich  His  perfect  discharge 
of  His  mission  has  given  Him.  What  may  be  the 
nature  and  mode  of  His  advocacy  is  beyond  our 
power  to  conjecture ;  but  we  can  feel  it  to  be  reason- 
able that  the  needs  of  the  creation  should  in  some 
such  way  find  representation  through  Him  who  is  its 
Firstborn,  not  only  ideally,  but  by  being  the  first  to 
pass  from  the  natural  into  the  spiritual  order,  "the 
First-begotten  from  the  dead"  (Col.  i.  18). 

The  second  activity  of  the  glorified  Christ  is  a 
result  of  the  first.  The  chief  effect  of  His  intercession 
on  behalf  of  His  disciples  was  to  obtain  for  them  the 
gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  "  I  will  ask  the  Father,  and 
He  will  give  you  another  Advocate,  that  He  may  be 
with  you  for  ever"  (S.  John  xiv.  16).  Although  in 
one  sense  that  request  was  fully  granted,  once  for  all, 
ten  days  after  our  Lord's  Ascension,  in  another  sense 
our  Lord  is  constantly  making  the  same  demand  and 
receiving  the  same  full  reply.  He  is  always  engaged 
in  sending  the  Holy  Ghost  to  us  from  the  Father. 
This  was,  it  seems,  a  thing  impossible  before  His 
exaltation.  "  If  I  depart  not,  the  Advocate  will  not 
come  unto  you ;  but  if  I  go  My  way,  I  will  send  Him 
unto  you"  (S.  John  xvi.  7).  Christ  had  not  yet  won 
the  Gift  by  His  Passion.  He  was  not  yet  in  a  posi- 
tion to  demand  it.    But  even  if  the  Gift  could  have 


2  20 


Divinity  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 


been  offered,  men  were  not  capable  o£  receiving  it,  so 
long  as  they  had  Christ  with  them  in  the  flesh.  The 
natural  presence  and  the  spiritual  presence  were  in- 
compatible and  mutually  exclusive.  It  was  necessary 
that  the  old  state  of  things  should  be  broken  up, 
before  the  new  and  supernatural  order  could  be  begun. 

§  4. 

That  Holy  Ghost,  whom  the  Redeemer  won  for 
His  brethren,  is,  as  we  have  shown  in  an  earlier 
chapter,  truly  and  essentially  God, — so  entirely  so, 
that  God  could  not  be  conceived  of  as  existing  without 
Him.  Though  only  manifesting  Himself  at  an  ad- 
vanced date  in  human  history,  the  Holy  Ghost  is  no 
late  development  of  Divine  activity.  His  mission, 
indeed,  like  the  mission  of  the  Son,  is  of  "  the  last 
days"  (Heb.  i.  2;  Acts  ii.  17);  but  He  Himself,  like 
the  Son,  is  co-eternal  and  consubstantial  with  the 
Father.  If  creation  had  never  existed,  the  Holy 
Ghost  would  have  always  existed,  and  must  neces- 
sarily exist,  in  the  fulness  of  the  Divine  Being. 

He  is  the  eternal  product  of  the  mutual  love  of 
the  Father  and  the  Son,  the  full  expression  of  either 
to  either,  the  bond  whicli  makes  the  two  one.  In 
this  sense  Ave  believe  that  doctrine  to  be  true,  which 
is  expressed  in  the  Filioqiie  clause  of  the  Creed.  A 
Catholic  believer  is  free  to  confess  that  he  cannot 
justify  the  way  in  which  the  clause  was  inserted 
by  the  Western  Church,  without  the  consent  of  the 
Eastern,  into  a  Creed  which  was  the  joint  heritage  of 
all.    He  is  bound  also  to  acknowledge  that  as  the 


His  Procession  from  Father  and  Son.  ill 


clause  stands,  it  needs  guarding  and  qualifying.  Yet 
it  would  seem  like  receding  from  the  truth,  if  the 
words  which  assert  the  Double  Procession  of  the 
Spirit  were  now  to  be  struck  out  from  the  Creed. 
Western  theologians  agree  that  the  Spirit  does  not 
proceed  from  the  Son  as  from  a  second  fountain 
independent  of  the  first.  Eastern  theologians  agree 
that  the  Spirit  does  not  issue  out  of  the  Father  with- 
out coming  through  the  Son.  As  the  Son  Himself 
is  perfectly  one  with  the  Father,  and  owes  all  that 
He  is  and  has  to  Him,  the  Spirit  owes  ultimately  to 
the  Father  whatever  belongs  to  Him  as  being  the 
Spirit  of  the  Son.  It  is  therefore  easy  to  hope  that 
an  agreement  may  be  reached  on  this  point,  as  soon 
as  East  and  West  are  in  a  position  to  understand  one 
another's  language,  without  adopting  the  theory  that 
the  Holy  Spirit  owes  only  His  temporal  mission  to 
Both,  His  eternal  procession  to  the  Father  alone. 
Such  a  theory  suffers  a  double  disadvantage.  The 
one  passage  of  Holy  Scripture  which  speaks  of  the 
"  procession  "  at  all  (S.  John  xv.  26),  appears  certainly 
to  mean  by  it  the  temporal  mission ;  and  it  refers  it 
only  to  the  Father.  Moreover,  we  must  needs  suppose 
that  the  respective  actions  of  the  Three  blessed 
Persons  in  time  are  founded  upon  Their  essential 
relations  to  each  other  in  eternity ;  so  that  if  the  Son 
can  be  said  now  to  send  the  Holy  Ghost  to  us  from 
the  Father,  it  must  be  in  view  of  some  deep  fact  by 
which  the  person  of  the  Holy  Ghost  is  subordinated 
to  the  Son  as  well  as  to  the  Father. 

All  the  languag;e  of  the  Bible  concerning  the  Holy 


222 


The  Holy  Ghost  a  Person, 


Ghost  shews  that  He  is  as  truly  a  Person  as  either 
the  Father  or  the  Son, — One  who  wills  (1  Cor.  xii.  11), 
who  searches  (1  Cor.  ii.  10),  who  intercedes  (Rom.  viii. 
26),  who  is  grieved  (Eph.  iv.  30),  who,  if  that  be  the 
correct  translation,  longs  yearningly  for  the  souls  in 
which  He  is  lodged  (S.  James  iv.  5).  And  yet, 
although  His  personality  is  so  clearly  marked.  His 
unity  w4th  the  Father  and  the  Son  is  equally  plain. 
His  coming.  His  abiding  presence,  is  the  coming  and 
the  presence  of  Christ,  and  not  of  Christ  only  but  of 
His  Father  also.  "  I  will  not  leave  you  comfortless," 
says  Christ,  speaking  of  the  mission  of  the  Spirit, 
I  come  to  you ; "  and  immediately  after.  He  adds. 
If  a  man  love  Me,  he  will  keep  My  word ;  and  My 
Father  will  love  him,  and  We  will  come  unto  him, 
and  make  Our  abode  with  him"  (S.  John  xiv.  18,  23). 

§  5- 

The  Father  alone,  as  we  have  said,  is  the  ultimate 
cause  of  the  eternal  being  of  the  Holy  Ghost;  and 
the  Father  alone,  ultimately,  bestows  Him  upon  men. 
But  none  the  less.  He  is  the  gift  of  Christ,  who  has 
received "  Him  from  the  Father  for  that  purpose 
(Acts  ii.  33).  Indeed,  as  known  to  us.  He  is  in  a 
peculiar  sense  the  Spirit  of  Christ,  and  not  only  the 
Spirit  of  God.  There  is  a  special  connexion  between 
Clirist  and  Him.  It  is  His  great  function  to  reveal 
Christ,  who  is  in  turn  the  revelation  of  the  Father. 
The  glories  of  the  Father  ai'c  not  displayed  to  us  as 
sucli ;  they  beccmie  intelligible  to  us  as  the  glories  of 
the  Son ;  and  therefore  the  Father  is  glorified  when 


His  Relation  to  Chris fs  Humanity,  223 


the  Holy  Spirit  brings  the  riches  of  Christ  before  our 
hearts.  "  He  shall  glorify  Me,  for  He  shall  take  of 
that  which  is  Mine,  and  shall  declare  it  to  you.  All 
things  that  the  Father  hath  are  Mine ;  therefore  said 
I  that  He  taketh  of  that  which  is  Mine  and  shall 
declare  it  to  you  "  (S.  John  xvi.  14,  15).  And  when 
He  makes  known  the  glory  of  Christ,  it  is  not  only 
His  glory  as  the  Eternal  Son  of  God,  but  as  the 
Incarnate  Son  of  Man.  He  interprets  and  applies 
Christ's  historical  work  to  its  proper  ends.  He  is  the 
full  Representative  of  Christ,  in  His  human  as  well  as 
in  His  Divine  nature. 

It  would  indeed  be  a  rash  innovation  upon  Catholic 
teaching  to  say  that  by  the  Incarnation  of  the  Son 
some  corresponding  change  took  place  in  the  mode  of 
the  Holy  Ghost's  existence,  or  to  imply  that  to  His 
Divine  nature  was  added  the  nature  of  the  human 
spirit.  It  has  never  been  taught  that  in  His  own 
Person  the  Spirit  of  God  has  become  humanised.  But 
none  the  less,  His  sympathy  with  the  Incarnation  is 
so  profound  that  He  is  able  to  express  with  perfect 
fidelity  all  the  movements  of  sanctified  human  nature, 
as  held  by  Jesus  Christ.  It  was  by  His  operation 
that  the  Word  was  made  flesh.  The  whole  early 
development  of  the  Incarnate  Life  was  under  His 
control.  At  the  Baptism  of  Jesus,  He  descended  in 
a  new  manner  upon  Him,  and  possessed  Him,  and 
imparted  to  His  human  soul  that  consciousness  of  all 
Divine  truth  which  was  typified  by  the  "  opened 
heaven"  (S.  Matt.  iii.  16).  The  dove-like  form  under 
which  He  was  pleased  to  betoken  His  coming  was 


224 


The  Spirit  of  Christ. 


a  sign  that  He  was  giving  Himself,  not  as  to  others 
"  by  measure  "  (S.  John  iii.  34),  dealing  out  particular 
gifts  or  graces,  but  in  all  His  personal  plenitude. 
The  life  of  Christ  became  thus,  we  may  say,  an 
adequate  historical  embodiment  of  all  the  influences 
of  the  Holy  Ghost ;  and  the  Holy  Ghost  became,  not 
indeed  confused  with  the  human  spirit  of  our  Lord, 
but  so  entirely  infused  into  it  and  so  exclusively  its 
animating  principle,  that  thenceforth  He  bears  for  us 
titles  which  set  forth  the  new  relation  into  which  He 
entered  with  humanity  in  Christ.  Thus,  for  instance, 
when  S.  Paul  says,  "  Because  ye  are  sons,  God  hath 
sent  forth  the  Spirit  of  His  Son  into  your  hearts, 
crying  Abba,  Father  "  (Gal.  iv.  6),  we  shall  not  be  far 
wrong  if  we  suppose  him  to  mean,  not  only  that  Spirit 
by  which  eternally  the  Son  feels  filially  toAvards  the 
Father,  but  that  Spirit  which  marked  Him  in  His 
Incarnate  life.  And  so,  after  His  Resurrection,  our 
Blessed  Lord  at  once  began  to  impart  to  His  disciples 
gifts  of  the  Holy  Ghost  as  being  His  own  to  give.  He 
breathed  upon  them,  from  His  human  mouth,  and 
said,  "Receive  ye  holy  Spirit"  (S.  John  xx.  22). 
Ascendino;  into  heaven  and  receivinof  the  consumma- 
tion  of  His  human  nature.  He,  in  His  human  nature, 
became  able  still  more  completely  to  absorb  and 
assimilate  the  fulness  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  Instead  of 
being,  as  in  the  days  of  His  flesh,  under  the  direction 
of  the  Holy  Ghost,  the  Holy  Ghost  came,  if  we  may 
say  so,  to  be  under  His.  As  man,  He  lias  made  Him 
His  own,  and  inspires  Him  into  men.  His  liumanity 
has  become  the  medium  for  transmitting  Deity  to 


The  Spirit  as  Finger  of  God,  225 

creation.  Whatever  Christ  does  now  in  His  Church, 
He  does  in  His  glorified  humanity;  and  He  does  it 
through  His  imparted  Spirit.  And  that  imparted 
Spirit  acts  upon  us  as  the  agent  of  one  who  is  still 
truly  human :  He  is  the  Spirit  of  Jesus "  (Acts 
xvi.  7). 

§  6. 

Since  the  beginning,  it  has  been  the  work  of  the 
Holy  Ghost  to  educe  in  creation  the  order,  and  the 
life,  which  belong  eternally  to  the  Word.  We  read 
that  when  the  materials,  out  of  which  the  world  was 
to  be  formed,  lay  in  undistinguished  confusion,  the 
first  movement  towards  arrangement  came  from  the 
hovering  of  the  Spirit  of  God  upon  the  face  of 
the  waters  (Gen.  i.  2).  He  is  named  by  our  Lord 
"the  Finger  of  God"  (S.  Luke  xi.  20).  The  name  ex- 
presses both  the  ease  and  the  delicacy  with  which  He 
moulds  and  finishes  off  in  detail  the  designs  of  God 
in  the  Word.  We  may  attribute  to  His  special  care 
that  beauty  which  is  the  most  impressive  evidence  of 
the  Divine  hand  in  nature,  and  the  faculty  by  which 
we  appreciate  that  beauty.  And  what  He  does  in  the 
domain  of  nature,  He  does  also  in  the  domain  of 
history.  The  working  out  of  the  Providence  of  God 
is  His.  It  was  He  who  prepared  the  way  for  the 
Incarnation.  It  is  He  who  fashions  the  character  and 
the  destiny  both  of  nations  and  of  individual  men  in 
such  a  way  as  to  conduce  to  the  glory  of  Clirist,  who 
is  the  object  and  purpose  of  all    And  He  is  also  the 

Q 


226 


His  Fiinction  in  the  Church. 


Spirit  of  life''  (Rom.  viii.  2).  By  His  own  incor- 
ruptible presence  in  all  things  (Wisd.  i.  7 ;  xii.  1),  He 
makes  the  universe  to  be  not  a  dead,  mechanical 
contrivance,  but  instinct  with  the  life  of  the  Word. 
Especially  in  the  Christian  Church,  He  is  seen  as  the 
Quickener,  both  imparting  the  original  spark  of  the 
Christian  life,  and  afterwards  renewing  and  reinvigor- 
ating  it,  for  the  Church  as  a  whole,  and  for  the 
Christians  who  compose  it.  The  gifts  of  order  and 
of  life  which  He  bestows  are,  when  viewed  in  their 
higher  aspects,  akin  to  those  of  holiness  and  of  liberty, 
which  are  His  most  characteristic  gifts  in  the  Church. 
It  is  His  aim  to  reduce  the  seething  chaos  of  human 
life  to  moral  order  and  beauty,  by  drawing  every  man 
to  share  the  holiness  of  Christ.  He  does  this,  not 
by  imposing  restrictions  and  laws,  but  by  inspiring 
healthy  affections.  "Where  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord 
is,  there  is  liberty"  (2  Cor.  iii.  17).  In  view  chiefly 
of  this  blessed  work  of  renovation,  of  applying  the 
redemptive  work  of  Christ,  of  the  inexhaustible 
energy  with  which  He  works  His  moral  miracles,  we 
call  Him  Creator: — Veni  Creator  Spiritus.  This 
work  of  holy  emancipation  which  He  carries  on,  is 
effected  through  His  inward  "teaching''  {e.g.  S.  John 
xiv.  26).  As  it  is  the  power  of  conscious  reflexion 
which  makes  the  difference  between  the  animals  and 
man,  so  the  heightening  of  consciousness,  or  rather 
the  infusion  of  a  new  and  Divine  form  of  conscious- 
ness, by  the  Holy  Ghost,  produces  sanctification. 
Such  teaching,  enlightenment,  realisation  of  the  trutli, 
are  everywhere  spoken  of  as  specially  the  work  of 


His  Work  on  Men  withottt  the  Church.  227 


the  Holy  Spirit.  Being  the  principle  o£  consciousness 
and  freedom  in  God,  He  becomes  so,  by  impartition, 
to  men. 

§  7. 

When  we  come  to  express  the  difference  between 
the  operations  of  the  Holy  Ghost  upon  men  before 
and  after  the  glorification  of  Christ, — or,  which  is 
much  the  same  thing,  between  His  work  upon  Chris- 
tians and  upon  those  who  are  not  Christians  at  the 
present  day, — we  find  both  the  poverty  of  language, 
and  also  the  difficulty  of  entering  with  any  fulness  of 
imagination  into  experiences  different  from  our  own. 
Could  we  ourselves  consciously  have  passed,  like  the 
Apostles,  from  the  earlier  stage  of  His  influence  to 
the  later,  we  might  have  been  able  better  to  point  the 
contrast.  To  them,  the  coming  and  presence  of  the 
Holy  Ghost  was  a  new  fact  so  marked,  so  perceptible, 
so  insistent,  that  they  could  appeal  to  it  without 
hesitation  in  testimony  of  their  doctrine.  He,  then, 
that  supplieth  to  you  the  Spirit,  and  worketh  miracles 
among  you,  doeth  He  it  by  works  of  law''  (Gal. 
iii.  5)  ?  "  Herein  perceive  we  that  He  dwelleth  in  us, 
by  the  Spirit  which  He  gave  us  "  (1  John  iii.  24). 

We  are  bound  to  believe  that  all  good  desires  and 
virtuous  practice  and  true  teaching  among  heathen 
people  is  the  result  of  the  "striving"  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  with  their  wills  (Gen.  vi.  3).  Amongst  the 
Chosen  People  under  the  Old  Covenant,  His  agency 
was  much  more  observable.  The  prophets  were  in- 
spired by  Him :   He  was  in  them     the  Spirit  of 


2  28    His  Mode  of  Operation  in  the  Church. 


Christ"  (1  Pet.  i.  11).  However  slowly  the  ethical 
ideas  of  the  people  at  large  were  purified,  individual 
saints  were  formed  before  Pentecost  whose  morality 
could  hardly  have  been  improved,  had  they  lived  in 
the  later  dispensation.  Yet  broadly  speaking  it  is 
true  that  in  those  days,  ''there  was  no  Holy  Ghost 
(in  the  world),  because  that  Jesus  was  not  yet  glori- 
fied "  (S.  John  vii.  39).  Since  that  event,  He  not  only 
bestows  His  grace  more  abundantly  on  those  who 
receive  it,  and  extends  it  to  a  greater  number  of  per- 
sons:— the  very  mode  of  His  operation  is  changed, 
both  in  its  outward  presentment,  and  in  its  inward 
character. 

The  Holy  Ghost  is  nov^  manifested  as  forming  and 
maintaining  a  corporate  Society  of  elect  men ;  and  in 
this  society  He  personally  and  permanently  dwells. 
Whereas,  before.  He  worked  upon  isolated  beings, 
raising  up  single  heroic  witnesses  to  His  power  amidst 
the  great  mass  of  unsanctified  humanity,  He  now 
works  upon  the  world  through  the  medium  of  a  com- 
pact and  united  body  of  men,  who  not  only  respond 
to  His  motions  when  He  calls  them  to  advancing  self- 
sanctification,  but  feel  themselves  responsible  for  the 
redemption  of  the  whole  world  around  them.  Where- 
as, before,  the  persons  who  came  under  His  influence, 
felt  it  as  something  external  to  themselves, — a  breath 
which  came  upon  them  and  went  again,  in  sweeping 
and  stormy  gusts, — it  is  now  felt,  both  by  the  Church 
and  by  the  single  Christian  as  an  internal  fact,  quiet 
and  settled, — sometimes  more  felt,  indeed,  and  some- 
times less,  }  et  always  there,  and  always  to  be  relied 


Genesis  of  the  Church, 


229 


upon.  He  gives,  now,  not  a  grace  only,  but  His  own 
personal  self,  to  make  both  the  whole  Church  and 
each  full  member  of  it  a  "  Temple "  for  His  own  in- 
habitation, where  He  is  "  at  rest  for  ever "  (1  Cor.  iii. 
16,  vi.  19;  1  Pet.  iv,  14).  This  could  not  be,  so  far 
as  we  know,  without  the  Incarnation  and  Ascension 
of  Christ.  Through  that  glorified  humanity  alone 
could  the  Holy  Spirit  find  an  inlet  into  the  very 
inward  parts  of  men  to  dwell  there ;  and  through  it 
alone  could  He  unite  all  those  persons  in  whom  He 
dwells  into  a  living  and  solid  whole. 

§  8. 

It  was  one  of  the  first  acts  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ  after  He  rose  from  the  dead  to  inaugurate 
the  new  departure.  He  can  hardly  be  said  to  have 
formed  a  Church  during  His  lifetime.  The  materials 
for  it  had  been  gathered ;  and,  in  separating  twelve  of 
His  disciples  from  the  rest  and  giving  them  a  title  of 
office.  He  had  even  begun  to  prepare  the  structure 
of  His  society.  But  He  still  spoke  of  the  creation  of 
His  Church  as  a  future  thing:  "Upon  this  rock  I 
will  build  My  Church"  (S.  Matt.  xvi.  18).  In  the 
outset  of  His  Passion,  He  gave  them  their  bond  of 
union  in  the  first  impartition  of  His  Body  and  Blood. 
But  as  yet,  it  was  only  like  what  we  may  imagine  to 
have  taken  place  at  the  creation  of  the  first  Adam, — 
the  dust  of  the  earth  being  got  ready  to  receive  the 
Breath  which  made  him  a  living  soul.  Then  came  the 
Breath.  Into  the  structural  unit  already  prepared, 
the  Risen  Lord,  on  the  evening  of  His  Resurrection, 


230         The  Chttrch  Christ's  Body, 

breathed  His  own  incorruptible  life  and  made  it  a 
Church.  The  gift  was  not  yet  that  full  gift  Avhich 
He  was  afterwards  to  give — not  "the  Holy  Spirit," 
but  ''Holy  Spirit" — a  gift  similar  to  that  which  is 
still  bestowed  in  Baptism, — the  gift  of  new  life  (S. 
John  XX.  22).  There  is  a  gradation  in  the  gifts  of 
God :  first  life,  afterwards  that  for  which  life  is  worth 
having.  This  first  gift  Jesus  was  already  competent 
by  His  victory  over  death  to  bestow.  The  second,  as 
we  have  already  said,  He  gained  by  His  Ascension. 
Then,  upon  the  regenerate  but  still  infant  Church,  He 
poured  forth  all  at  once  the  indwelling  Spirit  with 
His  mature  gifts  of  power,  of  holiness,  of  conscious 
knowledge,  and  of  world-convincing  utterance. 

§  9- 

When  the  Church  is  described  in  Scripture  as  a 
Body,  and  the  Body  of  Christ,  the  description  is  more 
than  a  metaphor.  It  is  not  a  case  of  mere  analogy. 
The  Church  stands  to  Jesus  Christ  in  the  same 
relation  as  a  man's  body  does  to  his  personal  self. 
Of  course  there  are  differences  in  the  mode  of  con- 
nexion, which  it  would  be  easy  to  point  out ;  but  the 
connexion  is  as  close  and  vital  as  in  the  case  of  the 
natural  body.  It  does  not  fully  explain  the  phrase  to 
say,  that  the  Church  is  as  dependent  upon  Christ,  as 
a  body  upon  connexion  with  its  head.  As  in  the 
animal  organism,  the  relation  is  not  one-sided  only ; 
it  is  reciprocal.  Connexion  Avith  the  Church  affects 
Christ's  life  as  well  as  hers.  Though  of  course  He  is 
not  in  any  way  dependent  upon  her  for  existence,  not 


The  CImrch  as  Chris fs    Fulness!'  231 


even  in  His  human  nature,  far  less  in  His  Divine,  yet 
the  Church  is  necessary  to  the  fulness  of  His  incarnate 
life.  The  union  between  Christ  and  her  is  so  real  that 
the  two  together  make  up  a  single  entity.  He  is  not 
His  whole  self  without  the  many  members  who  are 
joined  to  Him.  When  we  speak  of  "  Christ "  (though 
not,  of  course,  in  every  context)  we  speak  of  both  in 
conjunction.  For  as  the  body  is  one,  and  hath  many 
members,  so  also  is  Christ"  (1  Cor.  xii.  12).  A  very 
remarkable  and  difficult  passage  of  S.  Paul  brings 
out  this  reciprocity  of  relation.  It  speaks  not  only  of 
Christ  as  a  gift  to  the  Church,  but  of  the  Church  as 
performing  a  corresponding  function  for  Christ.  After 
dwelling  on  the  marvellous  greatness  of  the  hope  held 
out  to  us  in  the  Resurrection  and  Ascension  of  Christ, 
and  His  present  and  perpetual  supremacy  over  all 
creation,  the  writer  adds  :  And  Him,"  being  what  we 
have  now  described  Him,  He  gave  as  Head  over  all 
things  to  the  Church,  which  in  fact  (r/nc)  is  His  Body, 
the  fulness  of  Him  that  fiUeth  all  in  all "  (Eph.  i.  22, 
23).  So  the  last  clause  is  usually  translated;  but 
there  is  no  reason  why  the  verb  should  not  be  con- 
sidered passive  here,  as  in  other  similar  passages.  It 
will  then  give  an  even  stronger  meaning :  "  His  Body, 
the  fulness  of  Him  who  is  fulfilled  with  all  things  in 
all."  S.  Paul  is  thus  seen  to  say,  that  the  Church  is 
the  present  and  future  organ  of  Christ's  complete 
self -manifestation.  He  is  "fulfilled"  in  her.  In  and 
through  her  He  displays  the  richness  of  His  own 
exalted  life. 

This  is  the  very  meaning  of  a  '"'body."  That 


232    Christ's  oiun^Life  lodged  m  the  Church. 


Christ  has  a  heavenly  body  of  His  own,  apart  from 
other  men,  we  cannot  doubt, — in  which  He  is  mani- 
fested to  celestial  beings.  It  may,  however,  be  possible 
to  separate  too  sharply  between  that  Body  (sometimes, 
erroneously,  called  His  natural  Body),  and  the  Church 
which  is  His  mystical  Body.  But  whatever  the  re- 
lation may  be  between  His  glorified  Body  and  the 
mystical,  it  is  certain  that  He  has  not  done  with  the 
earth,  and  withdrawn  from  it.  He  still  is  incarnate 
not  only  in  heaven,  but  here  also.  He  wears  a  bodily 
presentment  upon  earth,  which  expresses  Him  and  is 
identified  with  Him.  Clothed  in  it.  He  acts  and 
speaks  among  men  still.  It  is  a  true  body,  with  a 
clear  and  visible  and  well-defined  outline,  as  well  as 
with  a  strong  differentiation  of  its  parts,  and  an 
organic  bond  between  them.  That  body  is  His  Church. 
It  is  not  enough  to  say  that  she  represents  Him,  for 
a  representative  has  a  personal  life  apart  from  him 
who  is  represented.  But  the  Church,  though  we 
legitimately  personify  her,  is  not  a  person,  and  has  no 
life  of  her  own  apart  from  Him.  It  is  His  life  which 
animates  her,  and  which  forms  the  bond  between  her 
various  members.  It  is  His  Sj^irit  which  inhabits 
Jier,  and  creates  in  her  an  identity  of  consciousness 
with  His  own,  so  that  the  Apostle  can  say,  "  We  have 
the  mind  of  Christ"  (1  Cor.  ii.  IG), — that  is,  we  not 
only  have  feelings  and  views  of  life  like  those  which 
He  entertained  {(\y^6vy]}i(x,  Phil.  ii.  5),  but  we  think 
His  own  tliouglits  and  sliare  His  inmost  intuitions 
(roue). 

Thus  the  Church  now,  as  Christ  Himself  when  Ho 


The  Church  an  Object  of  Sight  and.  of  Faith,  233 


was  on  earth,  is  an  object  both  of  sight  and  of  faith. 
She  is  a  visible  society  of  men,  which  all  the  world 
can  see  and  observe ;  "  a  city  set  on  an  hill (S.  Matt. 
V.  14).  Her  laws  and  organization  are  familiarly 
known.  The  most  worldly  and  unbelieving  of  states- 
men are  obliged  to  reckon  with  them  as  with  practical 
forces.  It  can  be  told  in  an  instant  whether  a  man 
belongs  to  this  body  or  not.  There  is  nothing  hazy 
or  uncertain  about  its  contour.  To  draw  a  distinction 
between  a  visible  and  an  invisible  Church  was  un- 
heard of  in  the  apostolic  or  in  primitive  days :  it  was 
the  confusing  and  sophistical  work  of  an  age  of 
schisms.  The  Church  is  not  called  a  "  mystical " 
body  because  of  difficulty  in  ascertaining  its  form ; 
nor  do  we  say,  "  I  believe  (in  the  existence  of)  the 
the  Holy  Catholic  Church  "  because  we  suppose  it  to 
consist  of  an  aggregation  of  devout  souls  known  only 
to  God.  Faith  comes  in  for  a  different  reason.  It  is 
because  faith  alone  can  discern  the  true  nature  of  the 
Society  which  is  seen  by  all.  Faith  alone,  amidst 
sore  trials  and  perplexities,  is  able  to  acknowledge 
that  the  life  of  the  Church  is  indeed  the  life  of  her 
Ascended  Head, — that  the  visible  company  of  men  is, 
in  spite  of  appearances,  the  home  and  the  embodiment 
of  a  Divine  principle,  which  will  never  leave  it,  nor 
suffer  it  permanently  and  universally  to  be  prevailed 
against. 

§  10. 

In  thus  describing  the  Body  of  Christ  as  a  visible 
structure  we  are  not  forgetful  of  the  generations  of 


234 


The  Communion  of  Saints. 


faithful  men  who  have  passed  away  from  this  world. 
They  are  still  members  of  the  mystical  Body.  Christ, 
who  has  "  ascended  up  far  above  all  heavens  that  He 
may  fill  all  things"  (Eph.  iv.  10),  presents  Himself 
in  due  form  alike  in  heaven  and  in  Paradise  and  on 
earth  ;  but  the  Body  in  v/hich  He  does  so  is  the  same 
Body  throughout.  This  is  not  the  place  at  which  to 
enter  on  the  doctrine  of  the  Intermediate  State :  but 
it  is  impossible  to  speak  of  that  Body  of  living  souls 
in  which  the  life  of  J esus  is  still  lodged,  without  say- 
ing that  the  unseen  parts  of  it  are  in  full  and  vital 
connexion  with  the  seen  in  "  the  communion  of  the 
Holy  Ghost "  (2  Cor.  xiii.  14).  The  dead  act  upon  the 
living  and  are  reacted  upon  by  them  in  ways  which  it 
is  not  easy  to  state,  but  which  are  none  the  less  real. 
Their  recorded  lives,  their  extant  writings,  the  un- 
dying consequences  of  what  they  did  Avhile  on  earth, 
the  tone  which  they  set ;  and  besides  that,  their  con- 
tinued intercessions,  of  Avhich  we  cannot  doubt,  and 
sometimes,  it  may  1)e,  still  more  direct  and  active 
interpositions;  in  all  these  ways  the  faithful  dead 
powerfully  affect  the  living  world, — so  much  so,  that 
one  of  the  latest  products  of  Old  Testament  inspira- 
tion, according  to  the  most  probable  interpretation  of 
it,  represents  tlic  world,  with  all  its  political  and 
social  forces,  as  helplessly  (though  unconsciously) 
enthralled  and  swayed  by  the  saints  at  rest  "  in  their 
beds"  (Ps.  cxlix.  5,  comp.  Isa.  Ivii.  1,  2).  And  in 
like  manner,  tliougli  wo  cannot  be  sure  how  far  their 
knowledge  of  current  events  on  eartli  extends,  with- 
out question  tliey  arc  in  some  way  interested  in  these 


Relations  of  the  Living  with  the  Dead.  235 

events,  so  far  as  they  affect  the  glory  of  Christ.  The 
successes  and  failures  of  the  Church  on  earth,  the 
hastening  or  retarding  of  the  final  Advent,  the  revivals 
of  true  religion  or  the  sinking  into  lethargy  and 
falsehood, — probably  also  the  spiritual  vicissitudes  of 
individual  souls  with  whom  the  connexion  while  on 
earth  was  close, — all  touch  the  departed,  though  we 
may  shrink  from  affirming  how.  This  lies  at  the 
base  of  those  latest  additions  by  which  the  Apostles' 
Creed  was  brought  into  its  present  form, — the  articles 
which  brought  out  the  descent  of  our  Lord  into  hell, 
and  which  affirmed  the  Communion  of  Saints/' 
By  those  articles  the  Christian  consciousness  made 
explicit  to  itself  the  feeling  that  death  does  not  break 
up  the  community  of  interests  which  are  eternal. 
There  is  so  necessary  a  fellowship  between  all  who 
are  vitally  united  to  Christ  that  they  still,  in  a  sense 
which  was  typically  shewn  forth  at  Jerusalem  in 
the  first  ays,  "have  all  things  common''  (Acts 
iv.  32). 

It  seems  hardly  necessary  to  add,  what  is  within 
our  immediate  perception,  that  the  Communion  of 
Saints  does  not  mean  only  the  fellowship  of  the  living 
with  the  dead,  but  the  fellowship  between  the 
members  of  those  classes  amongst  themselves  also. 
The  welfare  of  one  is  the  welfare  of  all.  The  ancient 
Stoic  philosophy  caught  a  glimpse  of  this  truth  when 
it  taught  that  every  "wise  man"  in  the  world  was 
benefited  by  every  other  wise  man's  acts  of  perfection. 
If  the  conception  had  been  enlarged  so  as  to  include 
not  only  a  proud  aristocracy  of  philosophers,  but 


236  The  Communion  of  Saint 3. 


humble  and  struggling  seekers  after  righteousness, 
and  if  the  community  had  been  not  one  between 
scattered  individuals  undiscoverable  to  each  other, 
but  between  all  the  members  of  a  well-known  and 
divinely  organized  Body,  the  Stoic  doctrine  would 
have  failed  but  little  of  the  perfected  idea  of  the 
Christian  fellowship. 


Chapter  VIIL 


&i)^xatkmtic^  of  t^c  ®\)nxdj. 

The  Notes  of  the  Chtirch  not  Visible  Tokens  but  Imuard  Characteristics— - 
Unity  of  the  Church  dependent  on  Historical  Continuity — Holijiess 
of  the  Church — The  Church  Catholic  mainly  in  respect  of  her 
Doctrine — Tradition  fixed  by  Scripture — Inspiration  aiid  Fulness  of 
the  Bible — Freedom  of  Investigation  and  Authority  of  the  Church — 
The  Church  Apostolic  in  virtue  of  her  Mission — The  Christian 
Ministry — Identity  of  the  Church  Militant  and  Tritimphant, 

%  1- 

Perhaps  the  simplest  definition  o£  the  Church  is  that 
which  will  have  been  gathered  from  the  foregoing 
chapter.  The  Church  is  that  organized  society  of 
men  which  was  founded  by  Jesus  Christ  upon  His 
Apostles,  and  which  received  from  Him  for  all  time 
the  gift  of  His  indwelling  Spirit. 

This  society  is  described  in  the  Creeds  by  four 
great  epithets.  The  notes,  as  they  are  called,  of 
Christ's  Church,  are  not  always  borne  as  visibly  upon 
her  front  as  they  ought  to  be.  This  must  with  shame 
be  confessed ;  and  those  who  maintain  that  the  true 
Church  is  so  unmistakably  distinguished  by  them  as 
to  be  known  from  false  Churches  at  a  glance,  are 
driven  to  strange  interpretations  of  history.  Never- 
theless, these  notes,  however  they  may  be  outwardly 


238 


The  Church  One. 


obscured,  are  deeply  engraven  upon  her  heart.  They 
are  more  than  a  mark  at  which  she  aims.  Her 
essential  being  is  bound  up  in  them;  and  so  far  as 
she  is  true  to  her  own  self  she  exhibits  them.  Although 
from  time  to  time,  and  in  particular  places,  the  men 
who  represent  her  may  fail  to  be  impressed  with  the 
character  described  in  these  four  words,  the  Church 
herself  never  loses  it.  Endowed,  as  the  Bride  of 
Christ,  with  an  imperishable  life,  the  Church,  as  long 
as  she  lives,  is  One,  Holy,  Catholic,  and  Apostolic. 

A  Church  which  is  the  embodiment  of  the  risen 
life  of  Christ,  and  the  instrument  of  His  indwelling 
Spirit,  is  necessarily  marked  by  unity.  The  Christian 
Church  is,  and  can  be,  but  one.  Much  confusion  of 
thought,  however,  exists  at  present  upon  this  point, 
and  earnest  inquirers  are  often  perplexed  by  the 
conflicting  answers  given  to  their  question,  where  this 
one  Church  is  to  be  found.  The  thought  which  alone 
offers  a  hope  of  clearness  is  that  which  is  touched  in 
our  definition  of  the  Church.  The  Church  is,  and 
can  be,  but  one,  because  Christ  founded  but  one 
society,  and  endowed  it  with  but  one  life.  His 
Apostles  were  not  sent  forth  to  form  separate  schools 
of  followers,  working  in  friendly  emulation,  and  eacli 
school  provided  with  some  partial  gift  of  the  Holy 
Ghost.  The  Apostles  were  the  united  cliiefs  of  a 
single  organization,  in  which  the  fulness  of  the  Spirit 
dwelt.  Their  watchword  was :  One  Body,  One 
Spirit''  (Eph.  iv.  4).    By  this  watchword  both  her 


Classification  of  Christian  Aggregates.  239 


numerical  and  her  integral  unity  are  secured,  and  we 
see  that  there  cannot  be  more  than  one  Church,  nor 
a  Church  composed  of  finally  severed  fractions.  A 
single  life  cannot  build  for  itself  more  than  a  single 
living  domicile ;  and  a  single  organism  cannot  repre- 
sent more  than  a  single  inward  principle.  The  one 
Spirit  is  a  guarantee  for  the  unity  of  the  Body ;  the 
one  Body  is  a  guarantee  for  the  unity  of  the  Spirit. 
The  Church  is  both  outwardly  and  inwardly  one, — 
one  through  the  whole  length  of  time  from  the  first 
century  to  the  nineteenth,  one  all  over  the  world  of 
space, — one  (as  we  have  said)  in  all  conditions  of 
human  existence  terrestrial  and  ultra-terrestrial.  The 
unity  of  her  origin  is  our  clue.  Firmly  grasping  this 
thought,  of  an  indestructible  and  Divine  life,  once  for 
all  imparted  to  a  single  historical  society,  we  are  able 
to  look  at  the  present  divisions  of  Christendom  and 
yet  say  that  the  Church  is  one. 

If  we  look  at  the  different  groups  of  Christians  in 
the  world,  we  shall  see,  in  the  first  place,  that  they 
are  of  two  classes.  There  are  those  which,  in  greater 
or  lesser  degrees  of  perfectness,  preserve  a  historical 
continuity  with  the  original  foundation  of  the  Church: 
and  there  are  those  which  have  a  later  origin,  and  are 
practically  new  societies.  To  the  former  class  belong, 
for  example,  the  Roman,  the  Coptic,  the  Scandinavian 
Churches;  to  the  latter  class  belonged  in  old  days 
the  Montanists  and  Novatianists,  in  modern  times  the 
Congregationalists  and  Irvingites,  and  many  of  the 
sects  of  Russia. 

With  regard  to  this  latter  class,  the  position  stands 


240        Position  of  Chidstian  Sects. 


thus.  The  men  who  compose  them  are,  as  individuals, 
members  of  the  Church,  provided  that  they  have 
received  Christian  Baptism,  though  they  have  pre- 
ferred to  transfer  themselves  to  other  bodies,  or  have 
been  brought  up  in  other  bodies  from  their  childhood. 
They  are  upon  the  roll  of  the  Church,  but  their  fellow- 
ship with  her  is  in  a  state  of  suspension.  In  order  to 
enjoy  the  full  benefits  of  the  Church,  they  have  but 
to  renounce  communication  with  the  separate  bodies 
to  which  they  are  attached,  and  they  are  at  once 
re-admitted  (if  there  be  nothing  else  against  them) 
to  active  membership  in  the  historical  society.  But 
the  separate  bodies  themselves  are  on  a  different 
footing.  There  can  be  no  question  of  intercommunion 
between  the  historical  Church  and  them.  Considered 
as  bodies,  they  form  no  part  of  the  Church  of  Christ, 
but  occupy  (even  when  unintentionally)  a  position  of 
rivalry  and  antagonism  towards  it.  They  are  Chris- 
tian sects,  in  so  far  as  they  are  composed  of  Christian 
men;  but  their  Christianity  is  (so  to  speak)  accidental; 
they  contain  no  perpetual  and  pledged  inhabitation  of 
the  Spirit.  Often  they  abound  in  graces,  which  put 
the  Church  to  shame;  but  the  graces  are  imported 
into  them  from  the  Church,  through  the  gracious 
persons  who  join  them :  they  are  not  communicated 
to  tlie  individuals  from  the  inherent  wealth  of  the 
separate  society.  And  so  it  comes  to  pass  that  such 
sects  live  out  their  lives;  and  after  performing  the 
work  for  which  the  Divine  Providence  allowed  them 
to  rise,  and  receiving  fitting  rewards  and  blessings 
from  God,  at  length,  like  otlier  liuman  institutions, 


The  Church  and  the  Churches.  241 


they  decay  and  disappear.  The  good  elements  in 
them  pass  back  into  the  historical  Church ;  the  worse 
element  is  hardened  into  active  "evil  will  at  Sion," 
and  like  the  grass  upon  the  housetops  "  withers  afore 
it  be  plucked  up"  (Ps.  cxxix.  5,  6).  While  the 
Church,  therefore,  is  unfeignedly  thankful  for  the 
good  which  it  pleases  God  to  do  through  such  socie- 
ties, and  can  join  with  them  in  many  good  works, 
and  loves  every  devout  member  of  them,  she  cannot 
acquiesce  in  their  separate  existence.  She  must 
always  yearn  to  draw  back  into  her  own  bosom  every 
choice  spirit  wdiich  adorns  them,  recognising  those 
spirits  as,  but  for  a  mistake,  her  own.  Every  useful 
suggestion  which  the  sects  can  make,  she  would 
endeavour  to  adapt  and  adopt,- — if  for  no  other  reason, 
at  least  to  take  away  any  semblance  of  just  cause  for 
remaining  aloof  from  her.  Meanwhile  the  unity  of 
the  Church  herself  is  clearly  not  broken  up  by  parties 
of  men  withdrawing  from  her  and  establishing  them- 
selves outside. 

We  turn  now  to  the  first  class  of  Christian  aggre- 
gates,— those  whose  historical  existence  dates  back  to 
the  first  formation  of  the  Church.  These  may  be 
called  ''Churches."  The  plural  title  does  not  con- 
tradict the  unity  of  the  Church.  W^hen  the  Apostolic 
writers  speak  of  ''  Churches,"  they  do  not  mean  inde- 
pendent organizations  spreading  themselves  side  by 
side;  they  mean  local  branches  of  the  same  world- 
wide organization,  the  Church.  Thus  in  Scripture  we 
read  of  the  Seven  Churches  of  Asia ;  and  in  modern 
language  we  can  legitimately  speak  of  the  Church  of 


242     Mutual  Relation  of  the  Churches. 


England,  the  Church  of  France,  the  Church  of  Scot- 
land. No  one  of  the  Churches  professes  to  be  the 
Church/' — except,  indeed,  the  Eoman.  The  popular 
exponents  of  the  Roman  belief  treat  "  the  Church 
as  exactly  co-extensive  with  that  group  of  Christians 
who  admit  the  claims  of  the  Roman  Bishop,  and 
thereby  they  go  near  to  reduce  themselves  to  a  sect, 
taking  that  for  its  basis  of  separation.  All  other 
Churches  are  ready  to  acknowledge  that  they  are  but 
parts  of  a  greater  whole.  They  do  not  consider  the 
gatherings  of  their  bishops  to  be  entitled  to  speak  for 
universal  Christendom ;  and  for  the  solution  of  final 
difficulties  they  look  on,  like  Cranmer,  to  "  the  next 
General  Council.'' 

Each  of  these  Churches  ought,  indeed,  to  display 
within  its  limited  sphere  the  four  notes  of  the  whole 
society,  and  to  be  inwardly  one,  as  well  as  holy, 
catholic,  and  apostolic.  But  the  failure  of  any  par- 
ticular Church  is  not  the  failure  of  the  whole,  nor  is 
it  fatal  to  the  doctrine  of  the  unity  of  Christ's  society 
that  men  may  point  to  a  local  branch  which  suffers 
from  inward  dissensions  or  confusions. 

These  various  Churches,  tracing  back  their  organic 
life  to  the  one  historical  source,  together  compose  the 
Church,  not  as  a  mere  aggregate,  but  as  indeed  a 
living  unit.  It  is,  however,  mainly  by  faith  and  hope 
that  we  perceive  their  unity  at  present,  and  not,  as  it 
should  be,  by  sight  also.  It  is  plain  that  all  these 
Churches  ought  to  be  in  full  communion  with  each 
other.  A  schism  within  the  Body  is  an  even  sadder 
spectacle  than  a  separation  from  it ;  and  those  who 


Excomimcmcation,  when  jttstified,  243 


are  responsible  for  the  beginning,  or  for  the  perpetua- 
tion, of  such  a  schism  are  guilty  of  the  gravest  of 
sins.  The  different  Churches  ought  to  deal  with  one 
another  in  the  largest  spirit  of  forbearance  and  ten- 
derness, remembering  that  in  the  imperfect  and  pro- 
bationary stage  of  existence  through  which  we  are 
passing,  errors  and  misunderstandings  cannot  fail  to 
arise.  They  ought  to  make  generous  allowance  for 
national  and  local  idiosyncrasies — to  welcome,  and  not 
only  to  tolerate,  wide  divergencies  in  thought  and 
practice,  as  all  tending  to  bring  out,  under  the  breath 
of  the  Spirit  of  charity,  the  manifold  fertility  of  the 
Christian  life.  Even  when  a  neighbour  Church  is 
to  blame,  and  becomes  corrupt  or  m_utilated,  it  ought 
not  to  be  excommunicated  unless  communion  with  it 
directly  involves  partaking  in  its  fault.  There  are, 
no  doubt,  occasions  when  it  is  necessary  and  right  to 
take  this  extreme  step.  When  sinful  terms  of  com- 
munion are  explicitly  imposed,  then,  but  only  then, 
separation  is  held  to  be  justified.  Yet  even  then,  the 
excommunication  ought  to  be  uttered,  not  in  human 
pride  and  anger,  but  in  love  and  meekness,  for  the 
sake  of  correction;  and  it  ought  to  be  removed  as 
soon  as  possible ;  and  incessant  effbrts  should  be  made 
to  regain  the  normal  relations  (2  Thess.  iii.  14,  15). 
To  the  primitive  Christians  it  would  have  been  im- 
possible to  imagine  the  situation  which  to  us  is 
familiar,  of  one  Church  quietly  ignoring  the  existence 
of  another  which  has  had  differences  with  it,  and 
going  on  as  if  it  were  only  concerned  with  its  own 
internal  affairs.    Selfish  isolation  of  that  kind  must 


244         Unity  not  destroyed  thereby. 


end  at  last  in  the  extinction  or  apostasy  of  such  a 
branch  of  the  Church ;  for  the  Spirit  by  which  the 
Church  lives  is  above  all  things  a  Spirit  of  love. 

But  unity  is  only  the  full  expression  of  love :  and 
where  there  is  love,  and  a  true  striving  after  recon- 
ciliation, the  loss  of  intercommunion  between  these 
branches  of  the  one  historical  society  is  only  a  tem- 
porary disaster,  not  a  real  disruption.  It  is  only 
impatience  and  unbelief  which  thinks  that  the 
Church's  original  unity  is  lost.  Most  imperfect  it  is, 
— sinfully  and  calamitously  so, — but  it  is  not  at  an 
end.  The  one  life,  once  given,  is  still  flowing  on 
through  those  apparently  divided  members,  and  must 
one  day  triumphantly  bring  them  again  into  a  unity 
made  the  richer  and  more  precious  for  having  been 
lost  and  found  again.-^  Even  now,  we  may  dwell  with 
thankfulness  upon  those  pledges  of  unity  of  which 
S.  Paul  speaks, — the  unity  of  the  object  of  the 
Church's  worship, — the  substantial  unity  of  the  doc- 
trine received  by  all  her  branches, — the  unity  of  her 
Sacraments  (at  least  the  chief  of  them)  which  are 
everywhere  the  same, — "One  Lord,  one  faith,  one 

*  It  may  be  observed  that  in  S.  John  x.  16  the  original  is  not 
correctly  rendered  in  tlie  Englisli  Bible.  Our  Lord  says,  "  They  shall 
become  one  llock,  one  Shepherd,"  not  "  There  shall  bo  one  fold."  It 
must  not,  however,  be  inferred  that  our  Lord  thought  of  having  many 
folds,  or  of  doing  without  a  fold  at  all.  It  was  the  custom  for  the 
Hocks  of  several  shepherds  to  be  enclosed  in  the  same  fold;  and  our 
Lord,  intending  to  include  in  His  new  Catholic  Church  both  the  Jews 
who  were  "of  this  fold,"  and  the  Gentiles  who  were  of  none,  promised 
that  they  should  not  only  bo  comprised  within  the  samo  external 
system,  but  should  be  completely  fused  into  a  living  unity.  Within 
His  one  fold  there  should  be  not  many  flocks,  but  ono,  ns  being  all  tho 
Ehcep  of  ono  Shepherd. 


U^iity  an  Aim,  not  only  a  Possession.  245 


Baptism (Eph.  iv.  5).  And  it  is  a  comfort,  in  our 
present  anomalous  condition,  to  observe  that  our  Lord 
does  not  exactly  pray  for  His  disciples  that  they  may 
be  kept  in  such  unity  as  they  already  had,  but  that, 
being  kept  true  to  the  revelation  of  God's  love  which 
they  had  received,  they  might  be  brought  thereby  to 
a  diviner  unity.  "Holy  Father,  keep  them  in  Thy 
Name  which  Thou  hast  given  Me,  in  order  that  they 
may  be  one,  even  as  We"  (S.  John  xvii.  11).  And 
S.  Paul,  in  the  same  chapter  where  he  speaks  of  the 
Christian  unity  as  a  possession  to  be  "kept"  by 
strenuous  exertions  (o-TrouSa^oirac  rrjpnv),  goes  on  to 
speak  of  it  as  a  goal  of  final  attainment,  not  as  a  fact 
already  realised.  All  the  gifts,  which  were  won  for 
the  Church  by  the  Ascension,  were,  he  says,  destined 
"  for  the  full  equipment  of  the  saints  unto  the  work 
of  ministry,  for  the  building  up  of  the  Body  of  Christ, 
until  we, — all  we, — arrive  at  the  unity  of  the  faith  and 
of  the  deeper  knowledge  of  the  Son  of  God,  at  a  full- 
grown  man,  at  the  measure  of  stature  which  expresses 
the  plenitude  of  Christ"  (Eph.  iv.  12,  13). 

§  3. 

The  same  fact  which  makes  the  Church  One, 
makes  it  also  Holy.  It  could  not  be  otherwise  with 
a  society  which  embodies  the  life  of  Christ  and  is 
animated  by  the  Holy  Ghost.  Here  again,  it  is  true, 
the  same  perplexity  encounters  us  as  in  considering 
Church  unity.  Appearances  are  often  against  us. 
The  state  of  the  Church  has  sometimes  been  a  scandal 
to  the  world,  and  to  religious  but  impatient  children 


246       Imperfect  Men  in  the  Church. 


of  her  own.  Again  and  again  detachments  of  men, 
disappointed  with  the  Church,  have  quitted  her  com- 
munion in  the  vain  hope  of  establishing  a  pure  society 
outside.  But  our  Lord  told  us  to  expect  that  in  its 
earthly  career  His  Church  would  contain  a  mixture 
of  good  and  bad.  He  likened  it  to  a  field  with  tares 
sown  among  the  wheat,  awaiting  the  harvest  before 
disentanglement  could  be  effected.  To  expect  the 
realisation  of  perfect  holiness  throughout  the  Church 
on  earth  is  as  vain  as  to  expect  the  realisation  of 
perfect  unity  or  perfect  knowledge.  Indeed  one  great 
aspect  of  the  Church  w^ould  be  destroyed  if  none  were 
admitted  into  her  fellowship  till  they  were  finished 
saints.  She  could  not  in  that  case  act  as  the  organ  of 
redemption  in  a  corrupt  world.  Like  our  Lord  Him- 
self when  on  earth,  if  she  would  recover  the  lost,  she 
must  be  truly  the  "  friend  of  publicans  and  sinners." 
She  is  constrained  by  the  very  spirit  of  holiness 
which  animates  her,  no  less  than  by  the  spirit  of  love, 
to  open  her  arms  freely  to  the  most  imjoerfect,  and  to 
attract  and  not  repel.  The  Church  is  a  school,  for 
instruction  in  righteousness,  as  w^ell  as  for  instruction 
in  doctrine  (S.  Matt,  xxviii.  19;  /uiaOrjTevGaTe).  All 
disciples  who  promise  fairly  are  welcome,  and  receive 
a  patient  education.  It  is  not  expected  that  those 
who  enter  the  sacred  shade  will  be  at  once  perfectly 
cured  of  all  sinful  impulses  and  erroneous  tendencies. 
Even  among  those  who  in  the  end  repay  the  care 
bestowed  on  them,  the  struggle  is  often  long,  and 
doubtful  to  the  last.  And  there  are  many  complete 
failures.    Not  all  the  disciples  of  the  Church  turn 


Her  Holiness  7tot  lost  through  them.  247 


out  well,  nor  all  her  teachers.  Sometimes,  in  the 
mysterious  ebb  o£  the  spirit  o£  sanctity,  ungodliness 
appears  to  take  possession  o£  large  tracts  of  the 
Church, — as  in  the  vileness  o£  the  fifteenth  century  in 
Italy, — or  the  deadness  o£  the  eighteenth  in  England. 
But,  not  to  speak  o£  the  faithful  work  which  even  at 
those  worst  times  is  being  done  in  secret,  the  Church 
does  not  lose  her  character  of  holiness  by  these  melan- 
choly lapses.  Though  in  a  certain  sense  even  the 
Church  as  a  whole  may  be  said  to  have  incurred 
guilt,  and  to  have  been  defiled,  yet  the  Spirit  which  is 
in  her  shews  itself  after  such  times  as  a  spirit  of 
repentance  and  return,  and  forgiveness  is  vouchsafed, 
and  the  sin  put  away,  and  the  Church  is  seen  to  be  a 
Holy  Church, — not  by  reason  of  having  never  fallen, 
but  by  reason  of  being    washed  "  (Eph.  v.  26). 

Nor,  indeed,  is  her  holiness  only  the  holiness  of 
a  thing  forgiven.  All  along,  the  sins  which  have 
stained  her  history  have  been  contrary  to  her  own 
principles.  Her  better  self  has  protested  against  them 
and  disowned  them.  Her  bitterest  assailants  have 
found  no  more  forcible  argument  than  to  expose  the 
inconsistency  between  her  holy  professions  and  the 
reprehensible  conduct  which  they  attributed  to  her. 
No  deliberate  consent  of  the  Church  has  ever  been 
given  to  any  sinful  thing.  Every  movement  towards 
improved  morality  has  had  its  origin  in  her  recognised 
doctrine  of  right  and  wrong.  However  she  may  have 
been  misrepresented  at  any  given  time  by  the  men 
who  publicly  stood  for  her,  the  aim  and  intention  of 
the  Church  was  always  to  maintain  and  diffuse  holi- 


248    Meaning  of  the  Word  Catholic^ 


ness,  and  to  save  men  from  their  sins.  This  is  the 
object  of  all  her  permanent  institutions, — the  sacra- 
ments, the  ministry,  the  preaching,  the  laws,  the  dis- 
cipline. If  ever  anything  was  done  which  was  false 
to  this  fundamental  purpose,  the  healthful  action  of 
the  infused  life  of  Christ  soon  reasserted  itself ;  and 
in  that  fellowship  one  with  another,"  which  is  estab- 
lished by  the  Church's  unity,  "the  Blood  of  Jesus" 
cleanses  the  Church  at  large,  as  well  as  the  penitent 
souls  within  her,  "  from  all  sin  "  (1  John  i.  7). 

%  4- 

The  reason  why  the  Church  is  called  Catholic  is 
frequently  misconceived.  It  is  supposed  that  the 
title  refers  mainly  to  her  local  extension.  So,  in  the 
Te  Deiim,  it  is  roughly  rendered  "  the  Holy  Church 
throughout  all  the  world."  But  any  Greek  scholar 
feels  at  once  that  much  more  than  this  is  involved  in 
the  very  form  of  the  adjective.  The  Church  is  not 
merely  r]  kuQoXov,  that  is,  the  Church  in  general,  as 
opposed  to  the  Church  of  a  particular  place  or  nation ; 
but  17  KaQoXiKi],  the  Church  whose  inward  character  is 
one  of  universality.  Thus  in  one  of  the  very  earliest 
writings  in  which  the  title  occurs — the  Martyrdom  of 
S.  Polycarp — a  separate  clause  is  felt  to  be  necessary 
in  order  to  convey  tlie  idea  of  actual  extension,  "  the 
Catholic  Church  throughout  the  world  "  (rr/c  Kara  rr/i^ 
(nKOv/uvr}v  kuOoXikTic  tfc/cXrjrrmc) ;  while  on  the  other 
liand  the  title  itself  is  given  to  a  single  branch  of  the 
Christian  Society,  and  Polycarp  is  styled — at  least 
accoi-diiig  to  one  form  of  th(^  t(^xt — ''Bishop  of  the 


The  Ckitrch  tmiversal  in  Extension.  249 


Catholic  Church  in  Smyrna  "  (r?}c  S/xujOvy  KaQo\i\a\q 
eKK\r}(j[ag),  The  fixing  of  the  word  to  its  more  out- 
ward sense  seems  to  be  due  to  Latin  writers,  not  well 
acquainted  with  the  Greek  language,  and  naturally- 
prone  to  think  more  of  practical  organization  than  of 
ideal  characteristics.  Oriental  teachers,  while  not 
excluding  the  local  notion,  rightly  insisted  on  the 
metaphysical  notion  as  well.  The  Church,  says  S. 
Cyril  of  J erusalem,  "  is  called  Catholic  because  it 
exists  over  all  the  world  from  one  end  of  the  earth  to 
the  other ;  and  because  it  teaches  universally  (kciOo- 
XiK(!jg),  and  with  no  omissions,  the  entire  body  of 
doctrines  which  men  ought  to  know."  The  real  oppo- 
site of  Catholic is  not  local,''  nor  even  partial," 
but  heretical." 

It  is  indeed  of  great  practical  importance  to 
remember  that  the  Church  is,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  far 
greater  than  that  fraction  of  it  with  which  any  one  of 
us  happens  to  be  acquainted.  It  enlarges  the  heart 
and  mind  to  meditate  upon  the  unity  of  those  widely 
spreading  branches.  But  the  very  reason  why  the 
Church  is  thus  spread  abroad  lies  in  her  intrinsic 
character.  It  is  her  nature  to  penetrate  everywhere 
and  to  embrace  all.  Resolutely  refusing  to  be  cramped 
and  petrified  and  stereotyped,  by  reason  of  the  free 
Spirit  which  animates  her,  she  is  capable  of  adapting 
herself  to  all  circumstances.  Our  religion, — no  longer, 
like  that  of  the  J ews,  given  under  a  form  suitable  to 
one  race  only, — is  equally  at  home  among  all  nations 
and  in  all  climates,  in  all  times,  under  all  forms  of 
government,  amidst  all  Vcarieties  of  social  and  intel- 


250    The  Church  tmiversal  in  Doctrine. 


lectual  culture.  In  fact,  like  Christ  Himself,  the 
Catholic  Church  is  in  sympathy  with  everything  that 
is  truly  human,  and  cannot  acquiesce  in  being  bounded 
by  anything  less  large  than  humanity,  being  indeed 
co-extensive  with  the  new  humanity  inaugurated  by 
Christ.  Her  mission  is  to  lay  hold  upon  every  soul, 
and — not  to  force  it  into  some  narrovf  and  uniform 
mould,  but  to  train  and  develope  it  into  shewing  forth 
those  features  of  the  life  of  Christ  for  which  it  was 
predestined. 

Nor  is  this  all.  If  we  enquire  still  further  what 
it  is  which  qualifies  the  Church  thus  to  deal  with  all 
conditions  of  men,  we  find  that  it  is  the  nature  of  the 
message  which  she  bears.  The  Church  is  a  Catholic 
Church,  because  her  Gospel  is  a  Catholic  Gospel. 
There  is  no  man  to  whom  it  is  inapplicable.  In  some 
respects  all  mankind  are  alike.  All  need  to  be  taught 
the  character  of  God ;  all  have  sinned,  and  feel,  at 
bottom,  the  need  of  some  reparation  for  their  sins; 
all  require  Divine  assistance  for  their  restoration  as 
individuals  and  as  members  of  society.  These  are 
the  needs  which  are  met  by  the  chief  elements  in  the 
Gospel ;  and  the  Catholic  Church  does  not  allow  her- 
self to  Idc  turned  aside  from  the  declaration  of  tliesc 
chief  elements, — to  the  right  hand  or  to  the  left. 
Wliilc  the  sects  form  themselves  for  the  purpose  of 
emphasizing  some  peculiar  view, — it  may  be  a  true 
one,  or  it  may  be  false, — or  for  the  purpose  of  pro- 
moting some  peculiar  practice,  wl\ether  right  or 
wrong, — the  Catholic  Cliurcli  liolds  on  her  way, 
rightly  dividing  the  word  of  trutli  "  (2  Tim.  ii.  15), 


Our  Tradition  secttres  Catholicism,  251 


— or,  as  S.  Paul's  word  more  probably  implies,  laying 
down  the  word  of  truth  like  a  great  road  that  goes 
straight  ahead,  without  losing  itself  in  side  issues  and 
speculations  which  lead  nowhither.  Not  that  the 
Church  is  careless  or  contemptuous  concerning  any 
legitimate  subject  of  inquiry.  All  truth  is  sacred  to 
her ;  and  her  Catholicity  is  displayed  both  in  her 
vigorous  maintenance  of  the  supremacy  of  the  great 
master-facts,  and  in  the  patient  orthodoxy  with  which 
she  works  them  out  in  their  application  to  detail. 
She  is,  then,  Catholic  mainly  for  this  reason,  because 
of  the  doctrine  round  which  she  rallies  men ; — because 
she  teaches  the  truth,  the  whole  truth,  and  nothing 
but  the  truth.  It  is  a  mistake  to  suppose  that  the 
Church  has  any  "  distinctive  doctrines ; "  for  every- 
thing that  is  true  is  an  integral  part  of  her  belief,  and 
everything  false  is  under  her  ban. 

§5. 

It  might  be  feared  lest  tliis  Catholicity  of  which 
we  have  spoken  should  pass  into  a  vague  colour- 
less, enfeebled  complacency  towards  all  persons  and 
parties  professing  to  seek  truth,  such  as  passes  at 
the  present  day  for  Catholicity  in  the  semi-Christian- 
ized world.  So  assuredly  it  would,  were  it  not  for 
the  power  of  the  primitive  Tradition  within  the 
Church.  Respect  for  her  traditions  has  always  been 
a  chief  note  of  the  Church,  and  the  great  safeguard 
of  her  Catholicity.  In  this  she  is  governed,  not 
merely  by  principles  of  human  conservatism,  but  by 
a  sense  of  Divine  responsibility.    Knowing  herself  to 


252    Binding  Force  of  Catholic  Tradition. 


have  no  earthly  origin,  the  result  of  mutual  consent, 
but  to  have  been  created  and  raised  up  by  God  for 
this  very  purpose,  to  bear  witness  to  Christ,  she  has 
always  felt  herself  bound,  as  the  first  of  her  duties, 
to  deliver  from  ao^e  to  ao^e  the  revelation  made  to 
her  at  the  outset,  unimpaired,  and  unadulterated. 
Voluntary  societies,  such  as  the  sects,  are  under  no 
such  obligations.  To  modify  the  doctrines  of  their 
founders  is,  in  them,  no  crime.  But  in  the  Church 
it  would  be  the  gravest  of  all  crimes.  She  believes 
that  her  Founder  was  Himself  "  the  Truth  "  (S.  John 
xiv.  6).  She  knows  that  He  imparted  to  her,  once 
and  for  all,  "  the  Spirit  of  truth  "  (S.  John  xvi.  13). 
It  is  her  conviction  that  in  the  first  burst  of  His 
inspiration.  He  opened  to  the  earliest  generation  of 
believers,  the  Apostles  and  those  next  to  them,  tlie 
entire  wealth  of  truth,  in  the  form  in  which  they  could 
apprehend  it  and  set  it  forth.  Through  those  illu- 
minated teachers  she  received  the  truth,  as  a  sacred 
trust,  for  the  benefit  of  humanity  to  the  furthest 
shores  and  to  the  latest  posterity.  "  Keep  the  deposit " 
(1  Tim.  vi.  20),  is  the  solemn  injunction  of  the  depart- 
ing Apostles.  "  Contend  earnestly  for  the  faith  once 
for  all  delivered  to  the  saints (S.  Jude  3),  repeat 
their  immediate  associates,  who  shared  their  inspira- 
tion. Let  no  innovation  be  made  upon  the  received 
tradition,"  is  the  response  of  the  Eoman  chair  in  the 
third  century.  Let  the  ancient  customs  hold  good," 
echoes  the  Nicene  Council  in  the  fourth.  To  this  test 
everything  is  brought.  Is  it  in  accordance  with  the 
liistorical  belief  and  practice  of  tlie  Cluirch  ?  If 


Its  Relation  to  Holy  Scriptttre,  253 


not,  it  stands  self-condemned.  By  this  test,  the 
Nicene  Fathers  rejected  Arianism.  By  this  test  the 
controversies  of  modern  times  must  be  settled.  No 
new-fangled  inventions  are  to  be  joined  with  that 
sacred  heirloom, — not  even  if,  in  some  quarters,  they 
are  now  inveterate  enough  to  have  gained  a  look  of 
antiquity  ]  and  if  any  portion  of  the  heirloom  has 
in  any  quarter  been  discarded  or  ignored,  it  must  be 
recovered  and  brought  into  use  again  before  the  claim 
to  the  title  of  Catholic  can  be  made  out. 

Holy  Scripture,  and  especially  the  New  Testament, 
is  the  anchor  of  Catholic  tradition.  It  would  not, 
indeed,  be  true  to  history  to  trace  back  all  Christian 
doctrine  and  practice  to  the  existing  writings  of  the 
Apostles,  for  the  Catholic  tradition  is  older  than  those 
writings,  and  there  are  many  phrases  in  them  which 
we  should  be  much  perplexed  to  explain,  but  for  the 
Catholic  tradition.  The  scattered  notices  of  the 
observance  of  the  Lord's  day  "  (Rev.  i.  10)  may  be 
given  as  an  instance.  We  know  what  these  mean, 
not  by  any  explanations  in  the  New  Testament  itself, 
but  by  the  practical  commentary  of  Church  life. 
But  one  chief  factor  in  the  value  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment is  this,  that  it  preserves  for  us  a  historical 
record  of  the  faith  and  practice  of  the  first  days,  to 
serve  as  a  standard  of  reference.  If  it  is  essential  to 
Catholicity  that  the  last  things  in  the  Church  should 
agree  with  the  first,  we  have  here  a  witness  which 
cannot  be  tampered  with.  It  might  have  been 
possible  for  the  Holy  Spirit  dwelling  in  the  Church 
to  have  secured  the  permanence  of  the  Church's 


254    T^^^^  Holy  Scriptures  a  living  Voice. 


doctrine  without  this  means;  but  as  the  Church  is 
an  aggregate  of  men  who  still  retain  their  natural 
propensities,  and  as  it  is  the  proverbial  tendency  of 
oral  traditions  to  gather  new  touches  and  to  lose 
some  of  the  old,  the  Holy  Spirit  has  provided  the 
Church  with  these  written  documents, — themselves 
the  gathering  up  of  her  own  first  and  best  thoughts — 
as  a  testimony  against  later  departures.  The  Holy 
Spirit  within  the  Church  is  constantly  bearing  witness 
to  the  Scriptures ;  and  if  the  appeal  to  the  Scriptures 
is  ever  distasteful  to  any  part  of  the  Church,  it  is  a 
clear  sign  that  some  other  spirit  is  usurping  the  place 
of  the  Spirit  of  Christ.  It  has  always  been  one  of 
the  proudest  boasts  of  the  Church,  that  she  is  the 
"Keeper  of  Holy  Writ."  Such  a  title  implies  her 
unalterable  fidelity  to  the  tradition  with  which,  under 
the  guidance  of  the  Apostles,  she  started  on  her  his- 
torical career. 

§6. 

But  while  the  Holy  Scriptures  are  the  great 
security  for  the  stability  of  Catholic  doctrine,  they 
represent  none  the  less  its  inexhaustible  richness, 
and  therefore  the  progressive  element  in  it.  They 
are  far  more  than  a  mine  of  antiquarian  information 
about  the  beliefs  and  practices  of  the  early  Christians. 
No  word  of  God  can  ever  become  a  dead,  obsolete 
thing.  The  Scriptures  are  a  living  and  eternal  Voice 
of  God,  speaking  to  all  ages  as  freshly  as  to  those 
who  first  received  them.  We  believe  that  the  Bible  is 
inspired.    There  is  no  portion  of  it  which  does  not 


Nature  of  their  Inspiration. 


255 


convey,  when  rightly  studied,  instruction  from  God  for 
the  guidance  of  thought  and  life.  Every  passage  of 
Scripture  is  full  of  Divine  inspiration,  and  profitable 
for  teaching,  for  reproof,  for  correction,  for  instruction 
which  is  in  righteousness''  (2  Tim.  iii.  16).  What 
S.  Paul  here  says  of  the  Old  Testament  is  at  least 
as  true  of  the  New. 

The  Church  is  committed  to  no  mechanical  views 
concerning  the  mode  of  the  Inspiration.  She  is 
satisfied  with  the  conviction  that  the  writers  were 
"  moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost "  (2  S.  Pet.  i.  21).  It  was 
a  heretical,  and  not  a  Catholic  teacher,  who  first 
maintained  that  the  human  penman  or  mouthpiece  of 
the  Spirit  was  a  passive  instrum^ent,  lying  with  his 
faculties  dormant  under  the  celestial  impulse,  like  the 
lyre  under  the  performer's  hand.  On  the  contrary, 
it  seems  true  to  believe  that  the  Holy  Ghost,  who 
"  distributes  to  every  man  severally  as  He  wills " 
(1  Cor.  xii.  11),  has  selected  His  own  agents  for  this 
high  task,  and  has  so  prepared  them  that  their  natural 
temperament,  their  circumstances  and  education,  their 
very  frailties  and  faults,  have  contributed  to  the  effect 
which  He  designed  to  convey.  As  He  was  to  speak 
to  men.  He  made  His  thoughts  first  to  be  the  thoughts 
of  men,  in  order  that  they  might  be  the  more  per- 
suasive and  intelligible,  and  instinct  with  human  life 
and  sympathy. 

Only  on  the  supposition  of  this  freedom  of  the 
inspired  agent  can  we  understand  those  little  varia- 
tions and  discrepancies, — perhaps  mistakes, — which 
meet  us  occasionally,  for  instance,  in  the  Synoptic 


256  Infallibility  of  the  Bible. 


Gospels.  It  would  expose  the  work  o£  God  to  derision 
to  think  that  S.  Matthew  was  directly  inspired  to 
speak  of  two  demoniacs  on  the  coast  of  Gadara  and 
S.  Mark  to  speak  of  one ;  but  to  those  who  have  the 
faith  of  the  Church  such  things  are  not  difficulties. 
On  the  contrary,  they  lead  a  reverent  and  thoughtful 
mind  to  a  more  profound  and  satisfying  conception 
of  inspiration,  in  which  the  Holy  Ghost  is  felt  to  lay 
hold  upon  the  very  roots  of  the  inspired  writer's 
being,  and  not  upon  his  fingers  only  Thus  the 
precise  form  in  which  the  writer  s  thought  clothes 
itself  appears  to  come  more  under  the  head  of  the 
Holy  Spirit's  providence  than  under  that  of  His 
special  inspiration.  It  was,  we  may  say  without 
irreverence,  the  Divine  aim  rather  to  breathe  a  spirit 
of  truth  than  to  secure  an  infallibility  of  the  letter. 
Not  that  the  Church  abandons  the  belief  that  the 
Scriptures  are  infallible  in  that  which  is  of  primary 
importance.  The  numbers  of  persons  slain  in  an 
Old  Testament  engagement  may  be  wrongly  given, — 
though  perhaps  by  the  error  of  copyists ;  a  quotation 
may  be  assigned  by  an  Evangelist  to  one  prophet 
which  really  belongs  to  another, — although  some  lost 
fact  might  give  a  different  aspect  to  such  phenomena ; 
— but  accuracy  upon  details  of  this  nature  cannot 
logically  be  put  on  the  same  footing  as  accuracy  in 
matters  of  doctrine,  and  worship,  and  moral  practice. 
We  could  understand  how  a  soul  like  S.  Paul's,  pene- 
trated with  intense  devotion  to  Christ,  might  turn 
with  indignant  contempt  from  a  learned  wrangle 
over  such  minutiae  of  historical  criticism,  but  by  the 


Its  Completeness  and  Stifficiency.  257 


very  same  impulse  throw  himself  ardently  into  con- 
troversy over  a  word  which  might  confuse  or  clear 
men's  minds  with  regard  to  the  nature  of  our  Lord 
or  His  method  of  salvation.  Absolute  infallibility  of 
doctrinal  statement  is  found  in  Holy  Scripture,  be- 
cause doctrinal  statement  is  the  outcome  of  a  whole 
inner  life  of  thought  and  adoration  and  experience  ; 
in  the  other  kind  of  cases  accuracy  is  but  a  matter  of 
memory  or  of  research. 

Infallibility,  however,  is  but  one  side, — and  that 
the  negative  side, — of  the  Scriptural  inspiration.  It 
has  always  been  the  conviction  of  the  Church  that 
the  Scriptures  which  she  has  received  are  not  only 
trustworthy  as  far  as  they  go,  but  that  they  are 
complete  and  all-sufficient.  Much  is  to  be  learned 
from  the  history  of  the  formation  of  the  Canon,  in 
which  again  the  general  providence  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  co-operates  with  the  instinct  imparted  by  Him 
to  the  Church.  There  is  no  reason  to  think  that  other 
writings  of  the  Apostles,  now  lost,  were  less  inspired 
than  those  still  extant, — any  more  than  unrecorded 
words  and  acts  of  our  Lord  were  less  Divine  than  the 
recorded  ones.  But  by  the  Divine  will  they  passed 
quickly  out  of  sight ;  and  the  Church  acquiesced  in 
their  disappearance.  It  was  gradually  felt  by  the 
Christian  consciousness  that  the  collection  of  books 
which  we  now  possess  under  the  name  of  the  Bible 
was  not  only  truly,  but  fully,  representative  of  the 
teaching  first  received,  and  that  the  preservation  of 
other  documents  would  have  swelled  the  bulk  of 
what  the  Christian  has  to  master,  without  adding  any 


258       Christian  Doctrine  progressive. 


new  element  to  its  richness.  Thus  "  unseriptural 
becomes  synonymous  with  "novel/'  and  therefore 
with  false,"  or  at  least  with  "  unnecessary."  Those 
"fierce  words"  (as  Jeremy  Taylor  calls  them)  of 
S.  Basil  well  express  the  feeling  of  the  Fathers  on 
this  point,  "  It  is  a  manifest  fall  from  the  faith  and  a 
manifest  incurrence  of  the  charge  of  arrogancy,  either 
to  make  light  of  anything  that  is  in  Scripture,  or  to 
introduce  in  addition  anything  that  is  not." 

Yet,  while  the  introduction  of  anything  novel  and 
unseriptural  as  an  article  of  faith  forfeits  the  title  of 
Catholic,  if  not  of  Christian,  the  eduction  and  develop- 
ment of  that  which  is  Scriptural  and  primitive  is  a 
mark  of  Catholic  vitality.  Fixity  in  dogmatic  expres- 
sion, the  invariable  repetition  of  orthodox  formulas, 
is  not  a  sure  sign  of  the  Catholic  heart.  It  may 
indicate  a  stagnation  of  devout  thought.  The  fidds 
of  Holy  Scripture,  though  ploughed  over  for  so  many 
centuries,  are  still  as  fertile  as  if  they  were  virgin  soil, 
and  every  century  teaches  the  Church  how  she  may 
expect  from  them  larger  and  larger  harvests.  No 
less  than  Polycarp  and  Clement,  we  sit  at  the  feet  of 
the  Apostles  theixiselves, — but  with  our  power  of 
understanding  them  increased  by  all  the  labours  of  the 
Saints  of  eighteen  hundred  years.  There  cannot  fail  f 
to  be  an  advance  in  the  Catholic  doctrine,  if  the  : 
Church  is  faithful.  The  only  caution  needed  is  that 
the  faith  be  not  altered  in  the  process.  S.  Vincent 
of  Lerins,  so  inexorable  towards  any  novelties,  has 
well  laid  down  the  lines  of  doctrinal  advance,  when 
he  compares  it  to  the  growth  of  a  living  thing ;  never 


Authority  and  Private  Jtcdgment,  259 


losing  its  identity,  and  always  preserving  its  pro- 
portions,— only  gaining  a  fuller  differentiation  of  its 
parts,  and  an  increase  of  solidity,  and  strength,  and 
suppleness. 

Thus  Catholicity,  like  unity  and  like  sanctity,  still 
gives  us  an  aim  to  be  aimed  at,  not  an  achievement 
lo  congratulate  ourselves  upon.  As  yet  the  Holy 
Spirit  has  much  to  do  to  "  lead  us  into  all  the  truth  " 
(S.  John  xvi.  13).  It  can  only  be  fully  accomplished 
when  every  particular  Church,  and  each  individual 
Christian,  insists  upon  winning  and  wearing  the 
Catholic  title.  "  Christian  is  my  name,"  says  S. 
Pacian,  "  and  Catholic  is  my  surname ; "  and  no 
Christian  man,  and  no  Christian  body,  can  without 
shame  make  any  other  confession.  But  the  only 
pledge  of  Catholicity  which  the  individual  or  the 
particular  Church  can  have,  lies  in  dutiful  deference 
to  the  authority  of  the  Church  at  large. 

Such  deference  is  not  a  blind  deference,  nor 
opposed  to  true  liberty  of  thought  or  to  what  is 
called  private  judgment.  There  come  times  when 
the  spirit  of  error,  like  that  of  unholiness,  spreads 
abroad  in  the  Church,  and  it  becomes  the  duty  of  the 
faithful  few,  or  the  faithful  one,  at  the  cost  of 
whatever  isolation,  to  withstand  the  prevalent  false 
doctrine  of  the  day.  Although  the  Church  is  in- 
fallible, yet  at  any  given  moment  the  truth  may  be 
driven  into  a  corner  within  her,  and  an  Athanasius, 
expelled  and  persecuted  and  anathematized  as  a 


26o 


Duty  of  Enqtmy. 


heretic  by  his  contemporaries,  may  be  the  narrow 
channel  through  which  the  stream  of  true  doctrine 
passes  from  the  fathers  to  the  children.  Each  Chris- 
tian is  bound  to  think  for  himself.  He  could  not 
otherwise  make  a  good  scholar  in  the  school  of  our 
Lord.  Neither  is  doubt  and  hesitancy,  in  accepting 
what  is  taught,  always  the  sign  of  a  wrong  temper. 
Doubt  of  the  truth  is  often  but  the  feeling  after  a 
more  delicate  form  of  truth.  Although  the  sceptical 
spirit,  which  can  only  criticize  and  never  firmly 
believe,  is  an  unchristian  spirit,  the  spirit  of  enquiry, 
which  believes  the  truth  to  be  attainable,  and  questions 
in  order  that  it  may  understand,  is  a  spirit  charac- 
terized in  Scripture  as  a  "noble"  one  (Acts  xvii.  11). 
Indeed,  the  Apostle's  words  would  justify  our  believing 
that  "  love  of  the  truth,"  even  when  entangled  among 
confused  and  wrong  conclusions,  may  be  more  pleas- 
ing to  God  than  the  most  correct  creed  held  without 
being  loved  (2  Thess.  ii.  10).  The  Apostle,  also,  and 
our  Lord  Himself,  recognise  that  there  is  in  men  a 
faculty  for  discerning  truth  which  may  be  trusted  to 
act  properly  if  properly  handled.  Thus  S.  Paul 
describes  his  method  as  that  of  one  who  "  by  the 
manifestation  of  the  truth  recommends  himself  to 
every  conscience  of  men  before  God  "  (2  Cor.  iv.  2). 
And  Christ,  speaking  "  to  those  Jews  who  had  believed 
Him  " — that  is,  who  had  but  taken  tlie  very  first  step 
of  faith,  and  were  still  far  from  satisfactory  views  of 
things, — said,  "If  ye  continue  in  My  word,  ye  are 
truly  My  disciples,  and  shall  know  tlie  truth,  and  the 
truth  shall  free  you"  (S.  John  viii.  31). 


The  Voice  of  the  Church.  261 


But  the  true  disciple  of  Christ  will  recollect  that 
he  has  not  joined  a  society  of  adventurous  guessers 
after  the  truth,  in  which  he  is  as  likely  to  guess  right 
as  any  one  else,  but  a  society  which  is  already  in 
possession  of  the  truth,  and  is  divinely  commissioned 
to  preach  and  teach  it.  And  though  every  man  may 
with  great  profit  verify  what  he  is  taught,  he  will  not 
approach  the  Scriptures  as  if  nothing  in  them  had 
yet  been  made  out  for  certain.  Much  still  remains 
to  be  explored ;  but  on  some  points  the  Church  has 
given  her  testimony  with  abundant  clearness.  It  is  too 
late,  for  instance,  to  expect  the  Church  to  reconsider 
the  doctrine  of  Christ's  Godhead.  A  man  may  treat 
it  as  an  open  question,  if  to  him  it  seems  so ;  but  if 
he  does,  he  sets  himself  up  as  a  judge  of  the  Church, 
and  therefore  of  Him  who  said,  "He  that  clespiseth 
you,  despiseth  Me,  and  he  that  despiseth  Me  despisetli 
Him  that  sent  Me"  (S.  Luke  x.  16).  The  same 
holds  true  of  many  doctrines  which  have  not  received 
as  explicit  a  declaration  from  the  Church,  but  on 
which  there  has  been  at  all  times  a  practical  con- 
sensus. 

If  it  be  asked  where  a  man  may  find  the  authori- 
tative teaching  of  the  Catholic  Church,  the  answer 
is  Jess  simple  than  human  impatience  would  wish. 
The  Church  is  divided  into  ecclesia  docens  and  ecclesia 
quae  docetur,  the  teachers  and  the  taught.  The 
superior  officers  of  the  Society  are  the  accredited  and 
authorised  exponents  of  her  doctrine.  Yet  it  is  never 
claimed  that  the  individual  priest  or  bishop  is 
rendered  unconditionally  infallible  by  the  tenure  of 


262      Truth  estccblished  by  Conference. 


his  office.  In  the  teacher,  no  less  than  in  the  taught, 
doctrinal  accuracy  depends  on  faithfulness  to  the 
illuminating  Spirit  and  loyalty  to  the  Church  at  large. 
There  is  no  sufficient  ground  for  making  an  exception 
in  the  case  of  the  see  of  Kome.  Nothing  but  an 
a  ^priori  demand  for  a  localised  infallibility  would 
have  led  to  such  a  notion, — and  it  has  been  falsified  in 
advance  by  history.  A  variety  of  reasons  led  the  early 
Christians  to  pay  profound  deference  to  the  Church  of 
the  city  of  Rome,  and  to  its  Bishop  as  representing  that 
Church ;  but  all  the  great  controversies  were  settled 
by  other  methods  than  a  recourse  to  him  as  if  he 
were  warranted  to  be  right.  It  is  impossible  to  make 
out  that  the  Catholic  Church  is  so  focussed, — so 
necessarily  focussed,- — in  the  occupant  of  one-  see,  that 
he  always  correctly  represents  her  tradition.  God 
has  taken  a  way  of  speaking  through  His  Church 
which  is  more  like  His  usual  methods,  more  vital  and 
less  mechanical,  than  that; — a  way  which  involves 
more  discipline  to  faith,  as  well  as  to  intelligence, 
than  the  consulting  of  an  external  oracle  and  the 
submission  to  ready-made  decrees. 

The  truth  is  not  finally  and  in  detail  defined 
except  by  collaboration  and  conference  of  the  whole 
Society.  To  all  the  bishops  of  the  Church,  according 
to  ancient  teaching,  the  guardianship  of  tlie  faith  is 
solemnly  committed,  individually  and  collectively. 
They  are  jointly,  and  yet  singly  and  equally,  respon- 
sible for  it.  What  is  decided  by  the  universal 
episcopate  may  be  presumed  to  be  a  Catholic  decision; 
but  even  so,  the  decision  is  referred  back  to  the  whole 


The  Chu7'c}is  Apostolic  Missmi,  263 


body  of  the  faithful,  and  Councils  are  not  reputed 
Ecumenical  until  their  decrees  have  been  ratified  by 
the  acceptance  of  all.  Neither  is  a  consensus  of  the 
entire  Church  of  to-day  sufficient,  unless  it  be  in 
harmony  with  the  teaching  of  other  ages  also. 
"What/'  asks  S.  Vincent,  "will  the  Catholic  Christian 
do,  if  some  recent  corruption,  not  content  with  con- 
taminating a  single  branch,  proceeds  to  contaminate 
the  whole  Church  alike  ?  At  such  a  time  he  will  see 
to  it  that  he  cleaves  to  antiquity,  which  is  beyond  the 
reach  of  modern  and  seductive  fraudulence.''  By 
such  reciprocal  action  between  Church  and  Church, 
and  between  the  teachers  and  the  taught,  and  between 
age  and  age,  unity  and  love  and  mutual  confidence 
are  developed ;  and  that  Spirit  of  Christ,  by  Avhom 
the  Church  is  made  Catholic  as  well  as  One  and  Holy, 
is  felt  to  pervade  the  whole  Body  both  in  time  and  in 
space. 

§  8- 

The  final  note  of  the  Church  of  God  is  that  she  is 
Apostolic.  This  title  belongs  to  her,  not  in  virtue  of 
her  teaching  the  primitive  doctrine, — or  aiming  at  a 
simplicity  of  life  like  that  of  the  Apostles,  but  in 
virtue  of  the  unfailing  Mission  with  which  she  is 
charged.  She  is  still  as  truly  sent  as  the  first  agents 
in  her  foundation  were, — nay,  as  Christ  Himself  was. 
In  fact,  her  mission  may  not  only  be  compared  to 
His  : — it  is  historically  the  same.  Every  word  in  our 
Lord's  great  sentence,  uttered  on  the  night  of  the 
Resurrection,  brings  this  out.     "According  as  the 


264      Perpetual  Youth  of  the  Church. 


Father  hath  commissioned  Me  {a-KkcsTokKkv  /xt),  I  also 
send  you {TrifXTrijj  vjiaq,  S.  John  xx.  21).  Our  Lord  s 
mission  was  not  come  to  an  end,  to  be  succeeded  by  a 
similar  one.  His  mission  was  still  in  force, — we  may 
say  rather,  was  just  coming  into  full  force ;  and  the 
way  in  which  He  exercises  it  is  through  His  Apostolic 
Church.  Nor  is  the  impulse,  by  which  He  first  sent 
the  Church  out,  spent,  nor  will  it  ever  be  spent :  it  is 
a  continuous  sending, — as  continuous  as  that  which 
makes  it  effectual,  namely,  the  flowing  forth  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  into  the  Church  (Rev.  xxii.  1).  It  was 
much  more  than  a  promise  of  doctrinal  infallibility 
which  Christ  made  when  He  said,  "  The  gates  of 
Hades  shall  not  prevail  against  her"  (S.  Matt.  xvi. 
18).  Dogmatic  error  is  only  one  of  the  forms  in 
which  the  life  of  the  Church  is  threatened  ;  but  she  is 
proof  against  them  all.  Particular  branches  of  the 
Church  may  decay,  and  die  out,  and  be  exterminated ; 
but  the  Church  as  a  whole  not  only  lives,  but  remains 
as  young  as  ever.  She  has  the  promise  of  shewing  no 
wrinkle  "  of  old  age,  as  well  as  that  of  shewing  no 
"  spot of  sin  (Eph.  v.  27).  No  powers  that  she  once 
had,  have  been  lost  to  her  by  the  action  of  time.  If 
she  is  tauntingly  asked  why  she  does  not  work  miracles 
now,  as  she  professes  to  have  done  in  earlier  days,  she 
cannot  without  unfaithfulness  say  that  the  power  to 
do  them  has  been  withdrawn  from  her ;  the  answer 
is  that  the  circumstances  have  changed.  Our  Lord 
Himself,  and  the  Apostles,  did  not  work  miracles 
except  when  they  perceived  tliat  circumstances  de- 
manded tliem ;  and  if  circumstances  again  demand 


Her  Sense  of  Mission  sometimes  zveak.  265 


them,  precisely  the  same  "  power  of  the  Lord  will  be 
present with  us  that  we  should  do  them  (S.  Luke  v. 
17)  ;  for  it  is  but  one  mode  of  operation  of  that  Spirit 
who  is  still  and  for  ever  the  life  and  vigour  of  the 
Church. 

At  times,  indeed,  she  is  apt  to  lose  the  sense  of  her 
Divine  mission  to  mankind,  to  abandon  enterprise 
amongst  the  unconverted,  and  to  rest  content  with 
looking  after  herself.  Portions  of  her  may  lapse  into 
worldly  ways, — either  by  what  is  called  Erastianism, 
— that  is,  by  putting  herself  at  the  disposal  of  earthly 
forces, — or  on  the  other  hand  by  an  imitation  of 
Imperialism,  using  her  spiritual  pretensions  to  exalt 
herself  into  a  kingdom  like  the  kingdoms  of  this 
world,  and  mistress  of  them.  But  in  spite  of  such 
unfaithfulnesses,  the  Lord  still  uses  her  as  His  pleni- 
potentiary envoy  in  the  world,  content  even  to  suffer 
by  her  misrepresentation.  From  age  to  age  she  goes 
on  exercising  the  powers  with  which  He  entrusts  her, 
in  His  Name  and  with  His  authority  preaching  the 
Gospel  and  teaching  the  truth,  forgiving  sins  and 
retaining  them,  binding  and  loosing — that  is,  laying 
down  regulations  for  the  discipline  of  her  children 
(S.  Matt.  xvi.  19), — blessing  and  interceding  and  offer- 
ing the  perpetual  Sacrifice,  administering  the  means 
of  sanctification,  and  appointing  men  to  sacred  offices. 

§  9- 

Here  comes  in  the  doctrine  of  the  Christian 
ministry.  We  must  plainly  recognise  at  the  outset  that 
it  is  the  whole  body  of  the  Church  which  is  apostolic, 


266  Priesthood  of  the  Laity. 


and  not  only  a  particular  order  within  it.  No  proof 
is  forthcoming  that  the  commission  given  by  Christ  on 
the  evening  of  His  Kesurrection  was  addressed  to  "  the 
eleven,"  to  the  exclusion  of  "  them  that  were  with 
them  "  (S.  Luke  xxiv.  33) ;  or  that  the  Holy  Ghost, 
on  the  day  of  Pentecost,  fell  only  on  the  Twelve,  to  be 
by  them  dispensed  to  the  rest.  The  entire  Society 
received  the  mission ;  the  entire  Society  received  at 
once  the  inspiration  by  which  it  was  qualified  to 
perform  it.  No  distinctions  that  exist  within  her  are 
such  as  to  break  up  the  Church's  unity.  Within  the 
apostolic  Church  all  are  priests.  There  is  no  sacerdotal 
caste, — as  some  opponents  of  Catholic  doctrine  have 
imagined  the  Church  to  create, — performing  religious 
offices  for  a  secular  laity.  The  contrast  between 
clergy  and  laity  is  that  between  a  higher  and  a  lower 
degree  in  the  priesthood.  This  is  implied  in  the 
ancient  title  of  "  Ordination,"  and  of  Holy  Orders," 
which  bear  witness  to  the  fact  that  the  difference 
between  clergy  and  laity  is  one  of  function  and 
arrangement  and  mutual  relations,  not  a  difference  of 
fundamental  opposites.  If  wilfully  severed  from  the 
faithful  laity,  the  clergy  would  have  no  right  to  act 
in  the  name  of  Christ.  Their  priestly  ministries  ai'c 
those  of  the  whole  body,  performed  through  them  as 
its  natural  organs. 

But  there  are  two  things  which  must  not  be  for- 
gotten. Those  who  deny  the  sacerdotal  character  of 
the  Christian  ministry  arc  too  apt  tp  destroy  along 
with  it  the  sacerdotal  character  of  the  Christian  laity, 
and  to  make  the  doctrine  that  we  all  are  priests 


Ministry  not  delegated  from  below.  267 


equivalent  to  the  doctrine  that  none  are.  The  true 
priesthood  of  Christians  contains  more  than  a  right  of 
direct  approach  to  God  for  ourselves.  It  consecrates 
us,  in  our  several  stations,  to  be  mediators  on  behalf 
of  others,  and  lays  upon  us  the  responsibilities  as  well 
as  the  privileges  of  spiritual  authority.  Promotion  in 
the  hierarchy  of  which  we  are  all  members  carries 
with  it  an  intensified  power  of  priesthood.  And 
secondly,  the  order  of  the  Church  is  not  a  thing  of 
conventional  polity ;  it  is  an  essential.  Our  Lord,  as 
we  have  said  before,  had  already  given  the  rudiments 
of  a  structure  to  His  society  before  His  Passion.  Such 
the  Holy  Ghost  found  it  at  His  coming,  and  as  such 
He  sealed  it.  It  would  have  been  strangely  incon- 
gruous for  that  Spirit,  whose  work  is  universally 
a  work  of  order,  to  choose  an  amorphous  and  un- 
organized collection  of  men  to  be  His  apostolic 
instrument  for  the  redemption  of  mankind.  In  order 
to  the  welfare  of  the  body,  the  proper  relation  of  the 
part  to  the  whole  must  be  preserved,  and  of  the  whole 
to  the  part;  and  if  the  eye  cannot  see  except  in  its 
place  in  the  body,  no  more  can  the  body  reject  the 
Divinely  appointed  eye,  and  develope  some  other 
organ  of  sight. 

It  is  sometimes  thought  that  the  ministry  of  the 
Church  derives  its  authority  by  delegation  from 
below ;  that  for  convenience'  sake  some  members  of 
the  society  are  deputed  to  represent  the  rest,  and  that 
the  functions  which  they  perform  might,  but  for  that 
deputation,  be  as  well  performed  by  any  other 
Christian.    Such  a  theory  is  not  agreeable  to  the 


268    Orders  and  Mission  given  by  Bishops. 


mode  of  ordination  prescribed  in  Scripture  and  prac- 
tised from  the  beginning  by  the  Church.  The  setting 
apart  of  the  first  deacons  may  be  taken  as  a  case  in 
point.  There,  the  faithful  laity  are  invited  to  select 
the  men  for  the  office ;  for  the  clergy  are  not  a  close 
corporation,  to  co-opt  among  themselves,  and  to  this 
day  the  voice  of  the  faithful  laity  is  asked  at  every 
Catholic  ordination.  But  their  nominees  do  not 
become  ministers  by  the  act  of  nomination.  It  is 
absolutely  reserved  to  the  supreme  order  in  the 
Church  to  determine  whether  they  shall  be  made  so 
or  not.  The  Apostles  "  appoint the  selected  persons 
(Acts  vi.  3) — this  is  the  investiture  with  mission  and 
jurisdiction;  the  Apostles,  with  prayer,  "laid  their 
hands  upon  them," — this  confers  on  them  the  sacred 
character  and  spiritual  gift,  by  which  they  are  in- 
delibly distinguished  from  the  rest  of  the  faithful,  and 
enriched  with  grace  for  their  duties.  These  two 
things  are  necessary  to  an  apostolic  Church, — that  its 
ministry  should  have  ordination  proper, — or  the 
sacred  character  and  gift, — and  mission,  or  the 
authority  to  execute  the  office.  To  these  is  added, 
for  the  sake  of  order  in  working,  jurisdiction,  or  the 
assignment  of  a  sphere  of  labour.  And  these  are  not 
given  by  the  mass  of  the  faithful,  or  by  their  lay 
representatives.  A  king,  for  instance,  may  appoint  to 
a  bishopric,  or  the  ratepayers  of  a  parish  elect  a 
clergyman  for  their  incumbent ;  but  the  clergyman 
only  becomes  incumbent  when  the  bishop  institutes 
him  to  the  charge  of  those  souls ;  and  the  king's 
nominee  remains  what  he  was  before,  until  the  bishops 


Necessity  of  the  Episcopal  Order.  269 


of  the  Church  have  laid  hands  on.  him.  If  the  theory 
of  delegation  from  below  were  correct,  the  ordaining 
hands  would  be  those  of  the  laity;  and  on  each 
avoidance  of  the  see,  the  representatives  of  the 
diocese  would  confer  on  the  man  who  was  to  be  their 
bishop  the  power  which  had  passed  back  to  them  at 
his  predecessor  s  death.  But  this  is  unheard  of  in 
Scripture  or  antiquity.  The  authority  to  ordain, 
along  with  other  powers  of  government,  is  lodged  by 
S.  Paul  solely  in  the  hands  of  a  Timothy  and  a  Titus 
(1  Tim.  V.  22 ;  Titus  i.  5),  who  are  responsible  for  it 
to  God  alone,  with  the  evident  intention  that  they  in 
their  turn  should  provide  for  a  due  succession  (2  Tim. 
ii.  2). 

Our  scanty  materials  for  the  history  of  the  end  of 
the  first  century,  and  of  the  beginning  of  the  second, 
have  caused  some  doubts  about  the  organization  of 
the  Churches  of  that  date ;  but  the  doubt  is  scarcely 
a  serious  one.  If  in  any  quarters  some  little  confusion 
for  a  while  prevailed,  it  had  all  passed  away  within 
the  lifetime  of  those  who  had  learned  from  Apostles 
in  person,  and  it  had  come  to  be  recognised  that  no 
Church  could  be  complete  without  the  three  orders  of 
the  ministry.  Bishops  alone  could  ordain.  By  whatever 
steps  this  conviction  may  have  been  established, — 
whether  (as  is  probable)  by  direct  command  of  the 
Apostles,  acting  on  the  instructions  of  our  Lord,  or  by 
the  natural  instinct  of  the  Church, — in  any  case  it 
was  the  work  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  The  apostolic 
succession  is  the  guarantee  of  the  continued  historical 
identity  of  the  Church.    No  Church  which  has  lost 


270  Identity  of  the  Chttrch 

it  can  complain,  if  the  validity  of  its  acts  is  questioned 
by  those  Churches  which  retain  the  primitive  tradi- 
tion. 

§  10. 

This  One,  Holy,  Catholic,  and  Apostolic  Church 
will  preserve  her  identity  not  only  to  the  end  of  this 
dispensation,  but  for  ever.  The  Bride  of  Christ,  and 
Mother  of  us  all,  has  a  career  which  resembles  in 
many  ways  that  of  any  typical  child  of  hers.  She  is 
on  her  probation  in  this  world;  and  though  we  are 
certain  that  she  is  indefectible,  yet  the  promise  is  not 
one  which  will  allow  of  the  relaxation  of  vigilance. 
Holy  Scripture  warns  us  of  great  fallings  away,  of 
false  doctrines  presented  under  specious  appearances, 
of  immoral  teaching  and  practice  supported  by 
miracles  and  made  to  look  like  the  severity  of  holi- 
ness. It  is  possible  that  the  true  Church  may  at  last 
be  but  a  remnant,  as  compared  in  numbers  with  the 
apostate  mass ;  possible  also  that  the  apostasy  may  be 
fostered  by  some  of  the  most  influential  sees  in 
Christendom.  There  is  no  positive  assurance  regard- 
ing the  future  of  any  special  Church.  But  the 
remnant,  if  so  it  must  be,  will  be  not  only  in  spiritual 
sympathy  with  the  Church  of  the  first  days,  but 
organically  the  same  with  it.  The  Church  which 
Christ  founded  will  not  die,  to  be  succeeded  by 
another.  She  is  now  imperfect,  in  her  unity,  her 
holiness,  her  belief,  her  sense  of  mission.  Then  she 
will  be  perfect.  But  perfect  and  imperfect  she  is  the 
same.    ''That  Cliurcli  which  now  contains  an  ad- 


now  and  hereafter. 


271 


mixture  of  bad  men/'  so  the  African  Catholics  main- 
tained against  the  Donatists,  "  is  not  different  from 
the  kingdom  of  God  where  there  will  be  no  such 
mixture.  It  is  one  and  the  same  Holy  Church, 
existing  in  one  condition  now,  and  in  another  con- 
dition hereafter." 


Chapter  IX. 


0imm  of  ffivace* 

Object  of  the  Means  of  Gi^ace  at  once  Social  and  Individual —  The  Word 
of  God — Fundamental  Principle  of  the  Sacraments — Their  Nnmhcr 
— Baptismal  Incoiporation  into  Christ — Washing  azvay  of  Sin  — 
Regeneration — Baptism  of  Infants — Administration  of  this  Sacra- 
vient — Confir7nation  —  Mode  of  administering  it — Christ  our 
Support  the  underlying  Idea  of  the  Euchai'ist — Doctrine  of  the  Real 
Presence — Chris fs  Body — Christ^ s  Blood — The  Eucharistic  Sacri- 
fice— Christian  Prayer — Absolution — Unction  of  the  Sick — Holy 
Orders  — Marriage. 

§  1- 

The  connecting  point  between  the  Church  and  the 
individual  Christian  is  in  the  means  of  grace  appointed 
by  Christ  and  employed  by  the  Holy  Ghost.  A  two- 
fold work  is  effected  by  them.  They  are  at  once  the 
means  by  which  the  Church  is  extended  and  consoli- 
dated, and  also  the  means  by  which  souls  are  made 
partakers  of  the  benefits  procured  for  them  by  the 
meritorious  work  of  Christ.  It  is  plain  from  such  an 
arrangement  of  Divine  wisdom  that  these  two  ends 
are  not  to  be  separated  from  eacli  otlier,  nor  is  the  one 
of  greater  importance  than  tlie  otlier.  In  Christianity 
the  single  soul  is  at  once  everything  and  nothing.  On 
the  one  hand  it  is  only  to  be  valued  in  so  far  as  it 


The  Preachmg  of  the  Word  of  God.  273 


serves  to  augment  the  kingdom  o£  God,  and  contri- 
butes some  special  gift  to  the  riches  and  fulness  of  the 
Christian  commonwealth.  Yet  on  the  other  hand, 
the  Church  herself  would  be  a  mere  name,  an  abstract 
and  barren  idea,  but  for  the  single  souls  which  com- 
pose her.  Though  she  is  a  living  thing,  and  not  a 
piece  of  formal  machinery  fitted  up  for  the  salvation 
of  souls,  yet  her  very  life  depends  upon  the  perform- 
ance of  the  saving  task,  and  she  only  gains  true 
existence  as  the  Bride  of  Christ  by  actually  bringing 
men  forth,  and  becoming  "the  Mother  of  all  living" 
to  the  New  Adam  (Gen.  iii.  20  ;  Gal.  iv.  26). 

§  2. 

First  amongst  the  appointed  means  of  grace  comes 
the  preaching  of  the  Word  of  God.  The  instinct  of 
the  Church  has  led  her  not  to'  class  preaching  among 
the  Sacraments,  although  there  would  be  much  reason 
for  doing  so.  It  was  distinctly  ordained  by  Christ 
Himself.  Preach  the  Gospel,"  He  said,  "  to  the  whole 
creation "  (S.  Mark  xvi.  15).  The  exterior  form  in 
which  it  is  clothed,  though  not  addressed  to  sight  or 
touch,  is  addressed  to  hearing,  so  that  the  body  also 
has  share  in  it,  as  in  other  sacraments.  And  it  cannot 
be  doubted  that  there  is  a  truly  sacramental  grace  and 
power  in  preaching.  The  words  are  not  mere  words, 
but  vehicles  of  something  beyond  words.  Christ  says, 
"  The  sayings  that  I  have  spoken  unto  you  are  spirit 
and  are  life  "  (S.  John  vi.  63).  Speech  altogether  is  a 
great  mystery ;  and  no  one  can  pretend  to  understand 
or  measure  the  power  exerted  by  mind  upon  mind  by 

T 


2  74         Why  it  is  not  a  Sacrament. 

means  of  vibrations  of  sound/  imparting  ideas  which 
alter  the  whole  career  and  character  of  a  man,  for 
good  or  for  evil.  Christianity  has  not  overlooked  so 
mighty  a  force.  If  preaching  is  not  reckoned  among 
the  Sacraments,  but  parallel  with  them,  it  is  because 
it  is  more,  not  less,  than  a  sacrament.  The  gift 
conveyed  through  it,  indeed,  may  not  be  greater,  but 
it  more  immediately  influences  the  springs  of  thought 
and  will.  Indeed,  there  is  a  sense  in  which  all  the 
Sacraments  depend  for  their  efficacy  upon  preaching. 
Without  faith,  they  are  received  in  vain ;  and  "  faith 
Cometh  by  hearing,  and  hearing  by  the  Word  of  God 
(Rom.  X.  17).  And  while  there  are  other  ways  by 
which  the  Word  of  God  can  find  an  entrance  into 
men's  hearts,  besides  the  public  preaching  in  the 
congregation, — as  for  instance  through  the  reading  of 
books,  or  the  conversation  of  religious  friends, — yet 
there  is  a  special  power  in  the  solemn  and  authorita- 
tive utterance  of  the  living  voice  in  the  Church.  It 
stands  related  to  the  private  modes  of  instruction,  as 
the  united  prayer  of  the  Church  stands  to  private 
devotion.  A  blessing  rests  on  either ;  but  the  former 
may  claim  the  promise  of  a  peculiar  presence  of 
Christ  (S.  Matt,  xviii.  20). 

No  doubt  another  reason  why  the  preaching  of  the 
Gospel  is  not  considered  a  sacrament  is  because  the 
"  outward  part ''  in  it  cannot  possibly  have  a  fixed 
and  unchangeable  form.  There  is  infinite  variety  in 
the  substance  of  the  preaching,  and  it  needs  present- 
ing in  an  infinite  variety  of  ways,  to  suit  the  needs  of 
many  classes  of  hearers.    Much  more  depends,  in  the 


Divine  and  hnnian  Elements  mixed,  275 


ministry  o£  the  Word,  upon  the  human  agent,  than 
in  other  ministries.  Even  such  adventitious  gifts  as 
eloquence  and  imagination  modify  the  result  pro- 
duced. Still  more  is  this  the  case  with  the  more 
valuable  inward  gifts.  The  more  deeply  the  preacher 
feels  the  reality  of  his  message,  the  more  effect  will  it 
have  upon  his  hearers ;  and  the  power  of  grace  is  to 
some  extent  paralysed,  when  the  word  is  unbelievingly 
or  unsympathetically  delivered.  But  however  much 
the  Spirit  may  be  ''quenched"  (1  Thess.  v.  19)  by 
the  minister  s  own  unfaithfulness,  or  by  the  reaction 
upon  him  from  the  apathy  of  the  congregation,  all 
Christian  preaching  is  an  operation  of  the  Spirit. 
Christ  still  speaks,  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  wherever  His 
appointed  ambassadors,  in  the  exercise  of  their  lawful 
calling,  speak  in  His  Name.  They  may  obscure  the 
Gospel  which  they  preach,  by  affectations,  and  errors, 
and  confusions ;  but  the  Divine  element  is  not  wholly 
wanting,  and  hearers  whose  hearts  God  has  touched 
will  be  able  to  discover  it,  in  spite  of  all  that  overlays 
it.  And  in  proportion  to  the  minister  s  singleness  of 
aim,  and  right  conception  of  his  office,  v/ill  the  Divine 
element  come  out.  A  self-conscious  ministry,  whether 
it  takes  the  form  of  apologetic  timidity  or  of  boastful 
display,  is  a  weak  ministry;  but  a  minimum  of 
natural  endowment  may  work  wonders,  if  used  in 
accordance  with  S.  Peter's  saying,  If  any  man  speak, 
let  him  speak  as  an  oracle  of  God"  (1  Pet.  iv.  11). 
The  Apostle  does  not  mean  that  the  man  is  to  speak 
what  is  in  keeping  with  the  Bible.  He  means  that 
each  person,  whose  business  it  is  to  speak  in  the 


276 


Duty  of  Meditation. 


Christian  Church,  is  called  upon  to  be  an  inspired 
prophet  of  God,  and  ought  not  to  be  contented  to  be 
less, — like  the  prophets  before  Christ,  or  the  prophets 
mentioned  in  the  Acts.  He  has  but  to  put  his 
faculties  at  the  disposal  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  to 
exert  them  faithfully  and  humbly  under  His  guidance, 
— and  he  will  be  an  oracle  indeed. 

Like  every  other  ordinance  in  the  Church,  the 
ministry  of  the  Word,  to  be  fruitful,  needs  to  be 
received  in  faith,  and  reflected  upon  in  after-thought. 
''A  forgetful  hearer"  (S.  James  i.  25)  carries  away 
no  benefit,  however  plentiful  the  outpouring  of  grace 
may  have  been  at  the  time  of  hearing.  Hence  the 
Church,  even  at  times  when  it  has  timorously  kept 
the  written  Bible  out  of  the  hands  of  people  in  general, 
has  always  encouraged  the  practice  of  meditation,  or 
pondering  upon  the  verities  of  the  Gospel.  A  close 
connexion  exists  between  the  public  ministry  of  the 
Word,  and  private  reading  and  meditating  upon  it. 
The  public  preaching  gives  guidance  and  vitality  to 
the  private  exercise,  and  a  faithful  use  of  the  private 
exercise  qualifies  the  Christian  to  receive  the  spoken 
message  with  increasing  intelligence  and  appreciation. 

§3- 

The  principle  on  which  all  Sacraments  are  based 
lies  deep  in  the  very  heart  of  the  Christian  faith.  It 
is  not  a  superficial  detail,  which  may  be  safely 
neglected.  It  has  its  root  in  nothing  less  fundamental 
than  the  relation  wliich  subsists  from  the  beginning 
between  cre^ition  and  the  Word,  or  even  in  the  nature 


The  Incarnation  a  Sacrament, 


277 


of  the  Word  Himself.  That  title  of  the  Divine  Son 
suggests  at  once  that  the  fulness  of  God  has  the 
tendency  to  express  itself  in  an  objective  form.  We 
have  already  seen  that  the  existence  of  the  Son  with 
the  Father  was  eternally  a  prophecy  and  pledge  of 
creation,  and  that  when  creation  is  launched  forth  to 
what  we  may  call  its  furthest  point  from  God,  there 
is  still  within  it  an  immanent  presence  of  the  Word, 
which  by  successive  stages  draws  it  again  towards  the 
Author  of  its  being,  until  the  moment  arrives  when 
the  Word  Himself  stands  in  the  midst  of  the  world 
which  was  made  through  Him,  visible  and  tangible, 
wholly  expressed,  and  fully  revealing  the  nature  of 
God,  in  a  body  fashioned  out  of  our  own  earthly 
substance.  The  Incarnation  was  itself,  in  the  language 
of  the  Fathers,  a  Sacrament.  It  linked,  by  no  fan- 
tastic or  unreal  or  conventional  union,  the  Divine  life 
to  a  material  form.  The  Word  was  made  flesh.  And 
so  far  from  the  union  thus  effected  being  severed  by 
the  Ascension,  it  was  extended  and  completed.  Christ 
"  ascended  far  above  all  heavens,"  not  in  order  to  be 
as  far  as  possible  removed  from  the  world,  but  "  that 
He  might  fill  all  things "  (Eph.  iv.  10),  uniting,  by 
His  own  living  contact  with  both,  the  height  beyond 
all  height  to  which  He  rose,  with  "  the  earth's  lower 
regions  "  (Eph.  iv.  9)  to  which  He  had  come  down.  In 
His  Incarnate  Person  is  now  focussed  and  concentrated 
the  fulness  not  only  of  the  Godhead,  but  of  creation. 
Jesus  Christ  is  in  living  connexion  with  every  part  of  it. 

An  immense  advance  is  thus  gained  for  our  religion 
upon  the  religion  of  the  Jews.    Theirs,  like  ours,  was 


278    The  Sacraments  not  Judaic  Symbols. 


a  religion  of  symbolism.  But  with  them,  the  symbol 
was  a  symbol  and  nothing  more.  A  certain  resem- 
blance may  be  found  between  their  circumcision 
and  our  Baptism,  between  their  sacrifices  and  our 
Eucharist;  but  the  difference  is  more  profoundly 
significant  than  the  resemblance.  To  them,  the  inner 
import  of  the  prescribed  action  was  a  lesson  which 
might  be  learned,  not  a  gift  which  might  be  appre- 
hended. Circumcision,  for  instance,  taught  the  Jews, 
in  a  striking  figure,  that  the  only  way  to  enter  into 
covenant  with  a  holy  God  was  to  put  awaj^,  even 
at  the  price  of  pain  and  blood,  the  corrupt  desires 
of  our  fallen  hearts ;  but  it  oflfered  no  help  towards 
putting  those  desires  away.  The  sacrifices,  in  a 
multitude  of  instructive  details,  pointed  on  to  One 
who  would  be  able  to  take  away  sin,  and  restore  com- 
munion between  man  and  God ;  but  they  took  no  sins 
away,  and  the  man  had  no  actual  communion  with 
God  by  eating  of  the  offering.  Yet  by  such  ordinances 
the  principle  of  symbolism  was  consecrated,  and  pre- 
pared for  a  higher  use.  Now,  since  the  glorification 
of  Christ,  and  the  outpouring  of  His  Spirit,  we  are 
presented  with  signs  which  not  only  speak  of  spiritual 
mysteries,  but  convey  the  things  which  they  speak  of. 
Otherwise,  the  institution  of  external  rites  would  be 
unworthy  of  Christ.  His  religion  is  a  spiritual  re- 
ligion,—a  religion  of  grace,  and  not  of  law.  It  would 
have  been  a  retrogression, — the  rcintroduction  of  a 
modified  Judaism, — if  Christ,  amidst  all  His  high 
spiritual  doctrines,  had  imposed  as  an  obligation  on 
His  Church  one  or  two  symbolical  acts  by  which  men  s 


Effectual  Signs  of  Grace.  279 

souls  would  not  be  enriched,  except  so  far  as  it  en- 
riches the  soul  to  profess  obedience  to  His  precepts 
and  to  keep  alive  its  sense  of  obligation  to  Him.  If 
such  be  our  view  of  the  Sacraments,  we  might  do 
well  to  follow  the  Quakers,  and  to  abjure  the  outward 
symbol  as  a  piece  of  mistaken  literalism.  There  is 
nothing  between  the  position  of  the  Quakers  and  that 
of  Catholics  which  makes  Christ  consistent  with  Him- 
self. If  the  Sacraments  were  what  Zwingli  made 
them,  they  would  not  be  Christian.  Christ  could  not 
have  devised  what  the  Article  calls  "  only  badges  or 
tokens  of  Christian  men  s  profession.''  If  the  Sacra- 
ments are  His,  we  may  be  sure  that  "  they  be  certain 
sure  witnesses,  and  effectual  signs  of  grace  and  God's 
goodwill  towards  us,  by  the  which  He  doth  work  in- 
visibly in  us,  a.nd  doth  not  only  quicken,  but  also 
strengthen  and  confirm  our  faith  in  Him." 

The  last-quoted  words  in  the  Article  bring  out 
one  merciful  aspect  of  the  Sacraments,  namely,  their 
adaptation  to  the  needs  of  weak  faith.  Even  if  heroic 
souls  could  get  on  without  them,  the  common  run  of 
Christians  may  be  grateful  for  not  being  permitted  to 
lose  blessings  by  a  too  universal  diffusion  of  them. 
A  gift  to  be  had  anywhere  would  by  most  of  us  be 
found  nowhere.  It  is  a  mercy  that  we  are  shown 
where,  and  when,  and  how,  the  spiritual  gifts  we  most 
need,  may  be  with  absolute  certainty  appropriated  by 
every  one  for  himself.  For  this  very  reason  it  is  most 
important  that  we  should  not  so  interpret  the  promises 
which  Christ  attached  to  the  Sacraments  as  to  make 
the  reality  of  the  grace  there  offered  depend  upon  the 


28o  Objectivity  of  the  Grace. 


faith  of  the  worshippers.  It  is  acknowledged  on  all 
hands  that  the  measure  of  grace  actually  imbibed  and 
taken  into  the  spiritual  system  is  proportioned  to  the 
receiver's  faith, — that  the  ill-disposed  gains  no  good, 
but  only  harm,  from  the  use  of  the  means  of  •grace, — 
that  the  man  whose  faith  is  strong  and  lively  gets 
more  out  of  them  than  the  man  whose  faith  is  inert 
and  half-hearted.  But  the  benefits  received  are  not 
necessarily  the  same  as  the  benefits  offered.  It  is  not 
the  worshipper's  business  to  create  or  conjure  up  a 
gift  which  is  not  there.  He  has  but  to  take,  and 
use  to  the  best  advantage,  a  gift  which  is  there.  We 
rely  upon  the  honour  of  Christ  to  be  ready  in  waiting 
for  us  with  all  that  He  has  engaged  Himself  to  give, 
and  not  to  hang  back  until  He  sees  how  much  faith 
we  bring  to  meet  Him.  Nothing  could  be  more 
daunting  to  those  of  weak  faith  than  to  imagine  that 
it  rests  with  them  not  only  to  receive  the  grace  when 
there,  but  in  some  sense  to  bring  it  there  also. 

But,  in  fact,  the  Sacraments  are  not  merely  an 
accommodation  to  the  needs  of  the  weak,  unless  the 
Incarnation  itself  is  to  be  so  regarded.  That  is  a 
notion  which  we  cannot  entertain.  Christ  did  not 
come  in  the  flesh  simply  because  it  made  it  easier  for 
ordinary  men  to  believe  in  what  He  did  for  them. 
He  came  to  unite  heaven  and  earth,  and  to  raise  the 
nature  which  He  assumed.  In  pursuance  of  the  same 
design  He  instituted  His  Sacraments.  By  them  He 
brings  out  the  true  dignity  of  tlie  visible  creation,  and 
still  furtlier  glorifies  it.  He  not  only  teaclies  that  the 
material  and  corporeal  can  be  made  a  basis  and 


Vital  Union  of  inner  and  outer.  281 


vehicle  for  the  spiritual,  but  He  actually  makes  it  so. 
It  does  not  satisfy  the  conception  of  a  Sacrament, 
when  seen  by  the  light  of  the  Incarnation,  to  say  that 
the  sacramental  action  typifies  in  the  external  order 
a  spiritual  process  taking  place  "pari  passu  in  the 
unseen.  To  think  so  would  be  to  apply  to  the  Sacra- 
ments the  principle  on  which  Nestorius  went  in 
speaking  of  the  Person  of  Jesus.  Neither  ought  we  to 
fall  into  an  opposite  error,  analogous  to  Eutychianism, 
and  confound  the  outward  and  the  inward.  The 
Sacrament  is  never  the  same  thing  as  that  of  which 
it  is  the  sacrament.  But  the  inward  and  the  outward 
are  wedded  together  in  a  vital  union.  We  find  the 
spiritual  grace  actually  embodied  and  presented  to  us 
in  the  action  or  the  element  which  symbolizes  it.  It 
is  lodged  there.  It  pleases  Christ  not  merely  to  give 
covenanted  graces  along  with  the  faithful  performance 
of  prescribed  ceremonies,  but  to  make  the  ceremonies 
quite  literally  the  means  of  grace,  and  to  charge  with 
His  own  fulness  the  thing  which  His  Church  uses  or 
does.  In  such  a  sublime  consciousness  of  the  living 
unity  of  the  outward  and  the  inward,  S.  Paul,  for 
instance,  does  not  scruple  to  say  to  Timothy,  "  I  put 
thee  in  remembrance  that  thou  stir  up  the  gift  of  God, 
which  is  in  thee  through  the  imposition  of  my  hands 
(2  Tim.  i.  6). 

Thus  the  Sacraments  are  the  beginning  of  the  ful- 
filment of  that  yearning  which  Pantheism  expresses 
and  distorts.  God  and  the  world  are  not  identical, 
nor  ever  will  be ;  but  God,  through  the  Incarnation 
of  His  Word,  is  drawing  all  things  into  Himself. 


282  The  Hallowing  of  Nature, 


"  Heaven  and  earth  are  full  of  His  glory  "  even  now. 
Every  portion  of  His  creation  is  a  concrete  manifes- 
tation of  some  fragment  of  Divine  thought,  and  ought 
to  impress  the  Christian  observer  with  the  sense  that 
he  is  on  holy  ground.  All  nature,  it  has  been  said, 
is  sacramental.  By  the  selection  of  representative 
materials  like  water  and  bread,  to  be  set  apart  for 
purposes  of  stupendous  import,  Christ  emphasizes 
this  thought  and  gives  it  point.  He  thereby  hallows 
all  natural  substances,  as,  by  the  appointment  of 
selected  holy  days.  He  consecrates  all  our  time.  That 
greatest  of  early  doctors  upon  sacramental  subjects, 
S.  Irenaeus,  fresh  from  the  traditions  of  S.  John, 
insists  with  peculiar  emphasis  upon  this  line  of 
thought,  which  was  made  the  more  significant  to 
him  by  the  Gnostic  disparagement  of  matter.  To 
him,  the  Eucharistic  Offering  is  the  offering  to  God  of 
"  firstfruits  from  His  creatures  " — and  that,  not  as  a 
separate  purpose  independent  of  its  being  the  offering 
of  Christ's  Body,  but  in  consequence  of  its  being  so. 
He  dwells  again  and  again  upon  the  action  of  the  Word 
in  nature,  as  preparing  nature  to  serve  the  purposes  of 
grace.  "  Since  we  are  members  of  Him,"  he  says,  "  and 
arc  nourished  by  the  creature,  and  He  Himself  provides 
us  with  the  creature,  making  His  sun  to  rise,  and  rain- 
ing according  to  His  pleasure.  He  confessed  the  cup, 
which  the  creature  supplies,  to  be  His  own  Blood,  with 
which  He  infuses  our  blood,  and  asseverated  the  bread 
supplied  by  the  creature  to  be  His  own  Body,  by  which 
He  augments  our  bodies."  It  is  the  vindication  of 
the  sanctity  of  matter, — the  condemnation  of  that  false 


Number  of  the  Sacraments.  283 


spirituality  which  sees  no  value  in  anything  which  is 
not  simply  spiritual.  S.  Iren^us  is  right  when  he 
connects  the  doctrine  o£  the  Sacraments  with  the  resur- 
rection o£  the  body,  as  well  as  with  the  Incarnation  of 
the  Word  and  with  the  creation  and  development 
of  the  world  through  the  Word. 

§4. 

It  is  a  matter  of  small  moment  how  many  sacred 
rites  we  include  under  the  title  of  Sacraments. 
Among  the  Fathers,  the  word  is  very  loosely  used. 
When  they  enum.erate  at  all,  some  speak  of  two 
Sacraments,  some  of  three,  some  of  four.  With  the 
advance  of  time  the  perfect  number  of  seven  came 
to  be  generally  recognised.  It  depends  entirely  upon 
the  definition ;  and  as  the  word  is  not  one  taken  from 
Scripture,  where  its  precise  significance  could  be 
ascertained  and  must  be  preserved,  the  Church  is  at 
liberty  to  define  it  as  she  pleases.  Nevertheless  it 
is  a  misfortune  that  new  significations  should  be  put 
upon  terms  of  long  ecclesiastical  standing ;  and  the 
question  whether,  for  instance,  marriage  is  a  sacra- 
ment, ought  never  to  divide  the  Church.  Clearly  the 
Articles  of  the  English  Church  intend  to  suggest  an 
inner  distinction  among  the  Sacraments,  when  they 
speak  carefully  of  two  "  Sacraments  of  the  Gospel,'' 
as  marked  off  from  "  five,  commonly  called  Sacra- 
ments,'' which  "  yet  have  not  like  nature  of  Sacraments 
with  Baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper."  And  it  is  to 
be  observed  that  the  Catechism  only  professes  to  deal 
with  those  Sacraments  which  "  Christ  ordained  in  His 


284 


Grouping  of  them. 


Church  ; "  it  does  not  deny  that  there  are  others, 
although  no  others  are  "  generally  necessary  to  salva- 
tion"— that  is,  necessary  for  all  men  alike, — or,  as 
others  interpret  the  phrase,  necessary  according  to 
their  kind, — "of  necessity  where  they  may  be  had." 
Those  two  are  generally  necessary,  inasmuch  as  with- 
out them  there  is  no  admission  into  the  Church  and 
no  active  membership  in  it ;  and  there  is  no  pledged 
salvation  outside  of  the  Church.  The  others  are 
properly  put  on  a  somewhat  different  level,  because 
they  are  ancillary  to  these.  Penance,  for  instance,  is 
the  continued  application  of  a  gift  already  conferred 
once  for  all  in  Baptism.  Confirmation  is  practically 
one  Sacrament  with  Baptism,  completing  what  Baptism 
begins.  Orders  is  a  special  development  of  the  grace 
given  in  Confirmation ;  and  so,  perhaps,  is  the  Unction 
of  the  Sick.  Marriage  is  not  an  exclusively  Christian 
institution,  though  it  receives  special  honour  and  grace 
in  the  bosom  of  the  Church.  Thus  there  is  clearly 
a  difference  of  importance  between  Baptism  (as  com- 
pleted by  Confirmation)  and  the  Eucharist  on  the  one 
hand,  and  the  rest  of  the  Sacraments  on  the  other. 
But  if  we  are  jealous  for  the  dignity  of  the  two  great 
Sacraments,  it  is  not  because  we  hold  the  others 
cheap.  There  is  a  world  of  difference  between  them 
and  those  edifying  ceremonies  in  wliicli  tlie  Church 
abounds,  but  to  which  she  does  not  attach  the  idea  of 
grace.  For  example,  it  has  long  been  the  custom  to 
marry  people  with  a  ring  for  "  token  and  pledge  ; " 
but  the  Churcli  would  condemn  it  as  a  profane 
superstition  to  suppose  that  the  grace  of  marriage  is 


Necessity  of  Union  zvith  Christ.  285 


conveyed  by  the  ring.  Sacred  symbolism  clusters 
round  all  the  Sacraments,  which  are  themselves 
Divinely  appointed  symbols ;  but  there  is  no  con- 
fusion between  those  acts  which  are  means  of  grace, 
and  those  which  are  only  impressive  parables. 

§5. 

Union  with  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  is  the  first 
thing  absolutely  necessary  to  salvation.  There  could 
hardly  be  a  greater  departure  from  Scriptural  Chris- 
tianity than  is  shewn  on  this  point  in  much  of  the 
popular  teaching  of  the  day.  According  to  this 
modern  Gospel,  union  with  Christ  would  appear  not 
to  be  the  soul's  starting-point  in  its  new  career  of 
development,  but  a  reward  to  be  attained  when  the 
soul  has  made  good  Christian  progress.  When  we  have 
been  justified  by  faith  in  Him,  and  have  lived  for  some 
time  in  accordance  with  our  faith,  we  may  then,  it  is 
implied,  expect  to  be  drawn  into  vital  union  with  Christ. 
This  is  an  inversion  of  the  true  order.  None  of  the 
characteristic  blessings  of  the  Gospel, — whether  justi- 
fication, or  sanctification,  or  Divine  knowledge,  or 
eternal  life,  or  any  other, — are  promised  to  any  except 
"  in  Christ."  A  measure  of  repentance  and  of  faith  can 
be  given  to  us  before  we  are  united  to  Him.  We  may 
have  a  true  conversion  of  heart  while  still  external  to 
Him.  But  these  gifts  are  not  the  special  gifts  of  the 
Gospel.  They  were  enjoyed  under  the  Law  as  well. 
They  were  the  chief  features  in  the  work  of  John  the 
Baptist.  To  become  partakers  of  Christ's  righteous-  ^ 
ness,  to  receive  His  merits,  we  need  something  more 


286       Baptism  admits  to  that  Union. 


than  to  stand  at  a  distance  and  believe.  The  type  of 
the  Brazen  Serpent,  with  all  its  wonderful  teaching, 
is,  after  all,  but  a  partial  type.  It  must  be  supple- 
mented by  such  rich  statements  as  these,  which  abound 
in  the  New  Testament,  "Him  that  never  knew  sin^ 
on  our  behalf  He  made  to  be  sin,  that  we  may  become 
Divine  righteousness  in  Him  "  (2  Cor.  v.  21).  "  Being 
justified  freely  by  His  grace  through  the  redemption 
which  is  in  Christ "  (Rom.  iii.  24).  "  In  whom  we 
have  our  redemption  through  His  Blood,  even  the 
remission  of  our  sins"  (Eph.  i.  7).  "Seeking  to  be 
justified  in  Christ''  (Gal.  ii.  17).  We  do  not  receive 
these  things  first,  and  then  become  one  with  Him.  It 
is  in  Him  alone  that  we  gain  them.  We  first  taste 
these  privileges  when  we  begin  to  realise  that  we 
have  already  been  made  to  share  in  the  life  of 
Christ  Himself. 

Without  faith  on  our  part,  our  union  with  Christ 
remains  inoperative,  but  our  faith  does  not  constitute 
the  union.  Faith  is  needed  to  make  the  union  re- 
ciprocal, fruitful  in  all  those  good  things  for  which 
the  union  is  established ;  but  faith,  by  itself,  would 
be  incompetent  to  put  us  into  that  union.  It  is  the 
act  of  Christ  Himself,  not  ours. 

Admission  into  Christ  is  the  great  gift  of  Baptism. 
All  Christians  are  agreed  that  Baptism  is  the  act  by 
which  we  arc  visibly  incorporated  into  the  historical 
Church.  But  if  the  historical  Church  is  what  we  have 
already  seen  it  to  be,  in  no  merely  figurative  sense  the 
Body  of  Christ,  then  incorporation  into  it  must  carry 
the  blessing  of  mcmbersliip  in  Christ.    And  this  is  in 


Union  with  Christ  a  Reality,  287 


fact  the  constant  doctrine  of  Scripture.  S.  Paul 
speaks  twice  of  being  "  baptized  into  Christ "  (Rom. 
vi.  3;  Gal.  iii.  27).  His  language  must  not  be 
explained  away  by  paraph  rases,  as  if  it  were  equiva- 
lent to  being  baptized  into  the  Christian  religion,  or 
into  the  Christian  covenant.  It  is  true  that  he  once 
also  speaks  of  being  baptized  into  Moses  "  (1  Cor. 
X.  2),  which  might  seem  to  justify  such  paraphrases. 
But  the  Apostle  is  there  expressly  comparing  the  two 
dispensations,  and  for  that  purpose  transfers  to  Moses 
the  language  properly  applicable  only  to  Christ.  He 
never  uses  expressions  concerning  Moses  such  as  he 
elsewhere  heaps  up  about  Christ, — "  members  of 
Christ,"  "  in  Christ,''  "  holding  the  Head,  even 
Christ,''  "Christ  liveth  in  me."  Evidently,  to  the 
mind  of  S.  Paul,  inspired  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  union 
with  Christ  was  infinitely  more  than  a  metaphor.  It 
did  not  mean  to  him  an  agreement  with  the  principles 
of  Christ,  or  sympathetic  intercourse  with  His  Person. 
It  meant,  literally,  a  participation  in  His  very  self. 
The  Christian  was  annexed  to  Him.  Christ's  own 
life  overflowed  him,  and  took  him  in,  and  extended 
itself  by  embracing  him.  And  there  was  a  definite 
moment  when  this  began  to  be  the  case.  It  was  the 
moment  of  Baptism.  Till  then,  the  believer  was  still 
being  acted  upon  from  without.  By  that  Sacrament, 
he  passed  into  a  new  relationship  to  his  Saviour,  like 
a  branch  grafted  into  the  vine.  He  was  no  longer 
without,  but  within. 


288       Baptism  a  Washing  fi'om  Sin. 


§  6. 

Two  main  blessings  flow  to  the  soul  as  a  direct 
consequence  from  this  admission  into  union  with 
Christ.  Of  these,  the  most  universally  recognised  is 
the  Remission  of  Sins.  The  Nicene  Creed  explicitly, 
in  the  words  of  Scripture,  connects  it  with  Baptism. 
The  Apostles'  Creed  does  so  by  implication,  when  it 
names  the  forgiveness  of  sins  as  the  first  consequence 
of  membership  in  the  Holy  Catholic  Church.  It  is 
implied  in  the  very  symbolism  of  the  Sacrament. 
Baptism  is  a  washing.  By  the  outward  application 
of  the  cleansing  element  is  typified  the  inward  ablution 
of  the  man  s  moral  self  which  accompanies  it.  Pro- 
bably this  was  present  to  our  Lord's  mind  when  He 
spoke  to  Nicodemus  of  being  "born  of  water  and 
spirit "  (S.  John  iii.  5).  The  mention  of  "  water " 
would  doubtless  recall  to  His  hearer  the  penitential 
rite  by  which  John  was  preparing  men  for  the  king- 
dom of  God.  At  the  same  time,  it  would,  especially 
when  contrasted  with  "  spirit,''  raise  the  thought  not 
only  of  the  outward  element,  but  of  all  that  the  out- 
ward element  meant.  By  being  "  born  of  water  "  our 
Lord  seems  to  have  pointed  to  the  cleansing  operation 
of  the  Holy  Ghost,  as  distinct  from  the  life-giving 
operation  spoken  of  as  being  born  of  spirit."  The 
symbolism  of  the  use  of  water  is  the  same  in  Christian 
Baptism  as  in  that  of  John.  In  both,  it  is  the  sinner's 
confession  of  guilt,  and  demand  for  a  purification  of 
conscience  (tlie  probable  meaning  of  1  Pet.  iii.  21).  But 
one  great  difference  between  John's  baptism  and  ours 


Christian  Baptism  no  mere  Symbol.  289 


is  this, — that  while  his  penitents  had  to  wait  for 
their  inward  washing  until  He  should  come  to  whom 
S.  John  pointed  them,  we  receive  our  inward  washing 
at  once,  by  means  of  the  outward.  John,  in  the  very 
act  of  baptizing,  confessed  the  inadequacy  of  his  rite ; 
but  no  sooner  was  the  Atonement  of  Christ  completed 
and  the  Holy  Ghost  come,  than  the  effectual  power 
was  added  to  the  significant  ceremony,  and  S.  Peter 
could  point  convicted  consciences  to  it  with  unfalter- 
ing assurance :  "  Repent,  and  let  each  one  of  you  be 
baptized  in  the  Name  of  Jesus  Christ  into  the  re- 
mission of  your  sins (Acts  ii.  38).  Conviction,  con- 
trition, conversion,  did  not  of  themselves  remove  the 
burden  and  stain  of  guilt,  but  the  Baptism  to  which 
these  led.  Thus  the  man  who  was  sent  by  our  Lord 
Himself  to  the  converted  Saul,  to  instruct  him  in  "  all 
the  things  which  were  appointed  for  him  to  do,''  deals 
with  him  as  still  not  cleansed,  and  shows  him  the 
way  to  obtain  the  cleansing :  "  Now,  why  tarriest 
thou  ?  arise  and  be  baptized  and  wash  away  thy  sins, 
calling  upon  His  Name"  (Acts  xxii.  16). 

All  sin  alike  is  washed  away  in  Baptism,  both 
original  and  actual.  The  soul  which  rightly  receives 
the  washing  is  no  longer  an  object  of  displeasure  and 
wrath  to  the  holy  eyes  of  God ;  because  all  the  guilt 
which  made  it  so  is  removed  by  the  passing  into  union 
with  Christ.  Nor  is  the  washing  to  be  considered  as 
only  retrospective.  Under  that  mistaken  notion, — 
combined  with  a  riorht  sense  of  the  increased  heinous- 
ness  of  sin  after  Baptism, — it  was  a  frequent  thing  in 
early  centuries  to  defer  the  Sacrament  to  advancing 

U 


290    Ete7'nal  Character  of  the  Washing. 


life,  or  to  the  death-bed.  Such  a  practice  not  only 
ignored  the  second  and  still  greater  gift  of  Baptism, 
by  which  we  are  qualified  for  a  holy  life  as  well  as 
for  a  peaceful  death ;  it  ignored  the  eternal  character 
of  union  with  Christ, — what  is  called  in  the  Prayer- 
book  "the  everlasting  benediction  of  God's  heavenly 
washing/'  Currents  catch  us  which  are  above  and 
beyond  time.  Our  inmost  selves  are  dealt  with,  not 
simply  the  succession  of  our  acts.  The  baptized  man 
is  not  barely  forgiven  up  to  that  point,  but  is  trans- 
planted into  a  region  of  forgiveness  in  Christ. 
Thenceforth,  unless  he  wilfully  banishes  himself  from 
it  again,  he  lives  and  moves  in  it.  He  is  not  indeed 
guaranteed  never  to  sin  again;  and  his  sins  for  the 
future  are  more  and  more  inexcusable,  in  proportion 
as  he  drinks  more  deeply  of  the  experience  of  life  in 
Christ.  But  not  every  sin  cuts  him  off*  from  union 
with  Christ.  Though  his  sins  may  weaken  the  union, 
yet  by  penitence  and  faith  he  will  be  preserved  from 
falling  altogether  away.  God  has  provided  His 
Church  with  means  to  keep  always  fresh  the  bap- 
tismal absolution,  without  any  repetition  of  the  bap- 
tismal act.  Indeed,  there  are  few  things  which  the 
Church  regards  with  such  horror  as  the  thought  of  a 
repetition  of  Baptism.  Even  in  this  sense  there  is 
"  one  Baptism  for  the  remission  of  sins."  We  cannot 
pass  backwards  and  forwards  in  and  out  of  the  sacred 
sphere  into  which  we  have  been  brought.  Either  we 
arc  in  Christ,  or  we  arc  not.  If  we  are  not  (after 
being  once  baptized),  then  nothing  can  put  us  back  in 
Him.    If  we  arci,  then,  tliough  for  our  sins  we  may 


Remission  comes  by  Regeneration.  291 


worthily  deserve  to  be  punished,  we  are  at  least  within 
reach  of  forgiveness.  It  is  still  ours,  if  we  will  put 
forth  our  hands  and  take  it. 

§  7. 

Forgiveness  is  the  primary  need  of  a  guilty  being, 
and  any  further  gift,  if  it  could  be  bestowed  upon  one 
under  condemnation,  would  be  to  such  a  one  a 
mockery.  Nevertheless  the  baptismal  union  with 
Christ  brings  with  it  a  blessing  out  of  all  proportion 
greater  than  forgiveness  of  sins.  We  could  imagine  a 
guilty  person  receiving  a  free  pardon,  and  yet  not 
raised  above  his  original  position.  This  is  not  what  is 
done  with  us.  Baptism  is  to  us  not  only  a  laver,  but 
a  "  laver  of  Regeneration  "  (Tit.  iii.  5).  The  connexion 
between  the  two  things  is  very  close.  They  are  not 
companions  by  accident.  According  to  the  pregnant 
phrase  of  the  Prayer-book,  we  receive  remission  of 
sins  hy  spiritual  regeneration."  It  might  otherwise 
have  seemed  as  if  the  order  could  be  reversed,  and  the 
man  might  be  said  to  be  born  again  because  he  is 
forgiven,  and  so  starts  fair  on  a  future  unprejudiced 
by  his  past,  a  new  man.  But  that  is  not  enough. 
The  union  with  Christ  which  he  has  received  conveys 
forgiveness  as  a  kind  of  inseparable  consequence, 
because  it  conveys  to  him  a  new  and  higher  form  of 
life.  We  need  forgiveness,  because  we  are  fallen ;  but 
Regeneration  places  us  on  a  higher  level  than  that  of 
our  unfallen  innocence.  Adam  in  Paradise  had  no 
such  glory  as  is  made  ours  in  Baptism,    The  Incarna- 


292       TVi?  are  made  Children  of  God. 

tion  o£  the  Son  of  God  has  done  far  more  for  us  than 
the  taking  away  of  our  sins.  It  has  made  us  "  par- 
takers of  a  nature  which  is  Divine "  (2  Pet.  i.  4). 
"  He  was  made  man/'  says  S.  Athanasius,  "  that  we 
might  be  made  Gods."  It  is  in  Baptism  that  we 
are  made  so,  through  incorporation  into  the  sacred 
humanity  of  Christ. 

This  is  to  be  understood  whenever  we  are  said  to 
be  made  in  our  Baptism  children  of  God.  Devout 
thinkers  like  Frederick  Denison  Maurice  felt  the 
difficulty  of  such  language,  because  it  seemed  to  deny 
that  we  were  the  children  of  God  before.  It  does  not 
really  deny  it,  however.  All  men  are  children  of  God, 
in  one  sense,  by  virtue  of  their  humanity  ;  and  though 
they  are  justly  banished  from  the  filial  privileges  in 
consequence  of  their  sins,  they  still  retain  a  natural 
kinship  with  the  Divine.  But  in  Baptism  we  receive, 
by  membership  in  the  Incarnate  Son,  a  new  kind  of 
filiation  altogether,  in  comparison  with  which  the 
unbaptized  might  rightly  be  said  not  to  be  children 
of  God.  It  is  for  this  reason  that  we  are  said  to  be 
"  adopted "  (Eph.  i.  5), — which  indicates,  not  the 
restoration  of  forfeited  rights,  but  special  admission 
to  rights  of  sonship  beyond  anything  which  nature 
could  have  claimed.  Our  adoption  does  not  give  us 
only  tJie  privilege  of  free  and  bold  access  to  our 
Heavenly  Father ;  it  brings  us  into  a  position  where 
we  ourselves  are  made  partakers  of  Christ  s  own 
sonship.  What  He  is  by  nature,  we  are  made  by 
grace,  in  Him.  It  is  not  by  His  taking  our  nature, 
but  by  our  receiving  His  in  consocpiencc,  that  He 


Regeneration  not  Conversion,  293 


becomes  the  Firstborn  among  many  brethren  "  (Rom. 
viii.  29). 

We  are  far  from  fully  grasping  the  Scripture 
doctrine  of  regeneration  if  we  consider  it  to  mean 
a  change  in  a  man's  moral  attitude  or  character. 
When  S.  John  says  that  "  every  one   that  doeth 
righteousness  hath  been  begotten  of  God "  (1  John 
ii.  29),  it  is  evident  from  the  context  that  he  does  not 
mean  simply  to  identify  moral  rectitude  with  the 
regenerate  life.    He  is  applying  a  test  Avithin  the 
Church,  not  to  Christians  and  others  indiscriminately. 
Righteousness,  love,  and  the  like,  when  seen  among 
Christians,  are,  in  his  eyes,  good  proof  that  their 
regeneration  has  been  successful ;  but  they  do  not 
constitute  regeneration.    The  idea  that  regeneration 
was  synonymous  with  conversion  was,  no  doubt,  in 
the  mind  of  Nicodemus,  when  he  suggested  that 
without  an  actual  return  to  infancj^  a  man  in  years 
could  never  take  a  really  fresh  start.    But  his  Divine 
Teacher  meant  something  more  profound.  However 
often  a  man  mio-ht  be  "  born  ao^ain "  in  Nicodemus's 
sense,  his  nature  would  not  be  essentially  altered.  It 
might  be  purified  and  elevated,  but  it  would  still  be 
flesh."    Our  Lord  had  come  to  introduce  an  entirely 
new  element,  unattainable  by  any  natural  process. 
"  That  which  is  born  of  the  flesh  is  flesh,  and  that 
which  is  born  of  the  Spirit  is  Spirit "  (S.  John  iii.  6). 
Flesh  may  attain  a  magnificent  nobility  of  character, 
a  sanctity  which  can  hardly  be  surpassed  even  in 
Christianit}^    It  did  so  in  the  case  of  S.  John  the 
Baptist.    Our  Lord  takes  him  as  the  highest  type  of 

I 


294 


Two  Nattcres  tmite  m  tcs. 


humanity  as  it  then  existed.  But  He  says  that  S.  John, 
after  all,  was  but  of  the  natural  order,  "  a  woman-born 
thing''  (S.  Matt.  xi.  11).  The  least  in  the  new  order 
should  be — not  better, — but  greater  than  he, — higher 
in  the  scale  of  being,  because  partaking,  not  only  of 
human  nature  at  its  highest,  but  of  the  Divine. 

Baptism  is,  accordingly,  a  means  whereby  the  In- 
carnation of  Christ  is  successively  extended  to  one 
human  being  after  another.  In  each  baptized  person 
there  is  something  which  may  be  compared  to  the 
union  of  the  two  natures  in  Him.  He  indeed  is  a 
Divine  Person  who  has  assumed  from  us  the  whole 
of  human  nature,  while  we  are  human  persons  who 
through  His  humanity  have  received  a  portion  of  the 
Divine.  He,  by  virtue  of  His  Divine  personality,  was 
incapable  of  sin  ;  and  we,  because  we  are  still  human 
first,  remain  liable  to  it.  But  in  spite  of  these  and 
other  profound  differences,  we,  like  Him,  are  com- 
posite beings;  we  have  two  natures,  though  each  of 
them  only  in  measure,  under  one  person ;  and  as  He 
vouchsafed  in  His  Incarnation  to  become  "  a  Man,"  so 
we,  by  being  baptized  into  Him,  become — as  He  said 
even  of  those  "  to  whom  the  word  of  God  came  "  under 
the  old  dispensation — ''Gods"  (S.  John  x.  35).  It 
requires  the  eye  of  faith,  however,  to  discern  it. 
When  we  are  true  to  our  regeneration,  the  effect  is 
perceptible  even  to  unbelief ;  but  unbelief  does  not 
understand  tlie  cause.  "  Tlic  wind  blowetli  where  it 
listeth,  and  thou  hcarcst  the  sound  tliereof,  but  thou 
knowest  not  wliencc  it  cometh  and  wliither  it  goeth  ; 
so  is  every  one  that  hath  been  born  of  the  Spirit" 


Infancy  stct table  for  Baptism.  295 


^S.  John  iii.  8).  So  it  was  in  the  earthly  life  of  Jesus 
and  so  it  is  in  ours.  Behold,  what  manner  of  love 
the  Father  hath  given  us,  that  we  should  be  called, 
and  are,  children  of  God !  For  this  cause  the  world 
knoweth  not  us,  because  it  knew  not  Him (1  John 
iii.  1). 

§  8. 

All  ages  are  suitable  for  Baptism ;  none  more  so 
than  infancy.  Regarding  Baptism  as  a  cleansing,  wc 
cannot  think  it  superfluous  for  infants,  inasmuch  as 
the  human  heart  from  the  outset  contains  the  germs 
of  sin,  however  undeveloped.  Nor  can  we  suppose 
that  infancy  is  incapable  of  receiving  grace,  or  our 
Lord  would  not  have  blessed  the  infants  v/hich  were 
brought  to  Him.  It  might  be  difficult  to  think  of 
infants  receiving  some  other  forms  of  grace,  but  not 
the  grace  of  regeneration.  Life,  by  its  very  nature, 
comes  as  an  absolute  gift,  not  by  the  choice  of  the 
recipient.  The  grown  up  man,  indeed,  may  ask  to  be 
baptized  and  the  new  life  be  granted  him ;  but  on  the 
other  hand  it  is  difficult  to  see  how  he  could  refuse  it, 
if  it  were  thrust  upon  him.  If  he  chooses,  he  may 
speedily  destroy  it  out  of  his  soul ;  but  he  has  had  it, 
even  though  but  for  a  moment.  Certainly  the  in- 
tellectual neutrality  of  an  infant's  mind  towards  the 
gift  can  form  no  obstacle  to  its  entrance.  Even  in 
later  life  it  holds  good  as  a  general  law  that  the 
sacramental  gifts  of  God  are  in  advance  of  our  under- 
standing, and  He  can  say  of  them  all,  what  He  said  of 
one,  "  What  I  am  doing,  thou  knowest  not  now,  but 


296  Christ  sanctifies  every  Age. 

shalt  perceive  hereafter"  (S.  John  xiii.  7).  And  in 
that  case,  the  sooner  it  is  received  the  better.  Christ 
considered  the  praise  which  came  "  out  of  the  mouths 
of  babes  and  suckhngs,"  to  be  the  perfection  of  praise 
(S.  Matt.  xxi.  16),  and,  with  indignant  repudiation 
of  the  contrary  opinion,  claimed  the  little  children  as 
peculiarly  fitted  to  be  the  subjects, — or  possessors, — > 
of  His  kingdom  of  grace  (S.  Mark  x.  14).  It  was 
significantly  pointed  out  by  S.  Irenaeus  that  the  sacred 
infancy  of  Jesus  Himself  proved  His  desire  to  lay 
hold  upon  human  life  not  only  in  its  later,  and  sadder, 
and  more  self-conscious  stages,  but  from  first  to  last. 
"  He  sanctified  every  age  by  passing  through  the  like  ; 
for  He  came  to  save  all  men  through  Himself;  all,  that 
is  to  saj^,  who  through  Him  are  born  again  unto  God, 
infants,  and  young  children,  and  boys,  and  young 
men,  and  elders.  Therefore  He  went  through  every 
age,  and  was  made  for  infants  an  Infant,  sanctifying 
the  infants;  among  young  children,  a  young  Child, 
sanctifying  those  of  that  age  likewise,  and  being 
made  also  to  them  an  example  of  aflfection  and  good 
principle  and  obedience  ;  among  young  men,  a  young 
Man,  becoming  an  example  to  young  men  and  sanc- 
tifying them  to  the  Lord ;  and  so  also  among  elders, 
an  Elder." 

Mindful  of  tlie  warning  of  our  Lord,  not  to  "give 
that  which  is  lioly  to  the  dogs  "  (S.  Matt.  vii.  C),  the 
Church  as  a  rule  refuses  Baptism  to  those  who  have 
no  sponsors.  It  is  the  part  of  the  sponsors  to  give 
security  to  tlic  Churcli  tliat  the  candidates  are 
properly  qualified  and  likely  to  make  good  use  of  the 


Validity  of  schismatic  Baptism.  297 


grace  bestowed,  and  also  to  see  to  it  that  they  do  so, 
as  far  as  they  reasonably  can. 

§  9- 

The  proper  minister  o£  this  Sacrament  is  the 
priest ;  but,  in  his  absence,  a  deacon  is  permitted  to 
give  it.  Indeed,  as  so  much  more  depends  upon 
admission  into  union  with  Christ  than  upon  any 
subsequent  gift,  it  has  always  been  held  lawful,  in  an 
emergency,  for  a  layman,  or  even  a  woman,  to  baptize. 
Furthermore,  the  Sacrament  is  held  to  be  valid  even 
if  the  person  who  administers  it  be  a  heretic  or  a 
schismatic.  So  long  as  he  uses  water,  and  the  sacred 
formula,  he  baptizes,  not  into  his  own  sect,  but  into 
the  Catholic  Church.  If  it  were  desired  to  make  a 
person  by  Baptism  a  member  of  a  sect,  it  would  be 
necessary  to  introduce  the  name  of  the  sect  into  the 
formula, — in  which  case  it  would  cease  to  be  Christian 
Baptism.  Unless  there  is  genuine  doubt  whether  the 
right  words  and  the  right  element  were  used,  condi- 
tional Baptism  ought  not  to  be  resorted  to  in  receiving 
into  the  Church  those  who  have  been  baptized  else- 
where. Any  irregularity  in  the  Baptism  was  thought 
in  ancient  times  to  be  covered  by  the  Laying  on  of 
Hands.  How  much  of  the  body  is  touched  by  the 
sacramental  element  makes  no  difference  to  the  effect 
of  Baptism  ;  but  immersion  is  the  normal  and  most 
instructive  mode  of  baptism.  The  Church  of  England 
allows  Baptism  by  affusion,  but  does  not  sanction 
Baptism  by  aspersion,  or  sprinkling. 


298      Confirmation  a  Part  of  Baptism. 


§  10. 

Confirmation  ought  not  to  be  regarded  as  a 
separate  Sacrament,  but  as  the  second  part  of  the  one 
Sacrament  o£  Baptism.  It  is  only  a  separate  Sacrament 
in  the  same  kind  of  way  as  the  Eucharistic  Chalice 
might  be  called  a  separate  Sacrament  from  the 
Eucharistic  Bread.  Christ  Himself  instituted  it,  when 
He  said,  Make  disciples  of  all  the  nations,  baptizing 
them  into  the  name  of  the  Father  and  of  the  Son  and 
of  the  Holy  Ghost"  (S.  Matt,  xxviii.  19).  Only  part 
of  the  baptismal  grace  is  bestowed,  when  the  baptized 
stops  short  of  Confirmation.  So  S.  Peter  understood, 
when  he  promised  to  those  who,  on  repentance,  were 
baptized  into  the  remission  of  sins,  that  they  should 
"receive  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost"  (Acts  ii.  38). 
So  S.  Paul  understood,  when,  on  discovering  the 
ignorance  of  some  at  Ephesus  with  regard  to  that 
gift,  he  asked  in  astonishment,  Into  what  then  were 
ye  baptized  ? "  (Acts  xix.  3).  From  this  close  con- 
nexion between  the  two  acts  the  distinctive  gift  of 
Confirmation  is  frequently  attributed,  both  in  Scrip- 
ture and  in  early  Fathers,  to  Baptism.  It  was  not 
tliat  the  gift  was  considered  to  be  conveyed  by  the 
baptismal  water  itself,  but  that  the  name  of  Baptism 
covered  the  Laying  on  of  Hands  as  well, — even  as  the 
Breaking  of  the  Bread  covered  also  the  participation 
of  the  Cup.  When  circumstances  forced  the  separa- 
tion of  the  two  parts  of  the  Sacrament,  the  distinction 
between  them  was  recognised  clearly  enough.  "  They 
prayed  for  them,  with  a  view  to  their  receiving  the 


The  Spirit  not    given''  in  Baptism.  299 


Holy  Ghost ;  for  as  yet  He  was  fallen  upon  none  of 
them,  but  they  were  only  in  the  position  of  having 
been  baptized  into  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus.  Then 
they  laid  their  hands  upon  them,  and  they  received 
the  Holy  Ghost"  (Acts  viii.  15-17).  While  this 
passage  shews  unmistakably  that  the  gift  of  the 
Holy  Ghost  was  associated  with  the  Laying  on  of 
Hands,  not  with  the  baptismal  Water,  the  word 
"only"  shews  no  less  unmistakably  that  Baptism 
was  considered  incomplete  without  it. 

All  operations  of  Christ  in  His  Church  are  per- 
formed through  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  assuredly  the 
act  by  which  we  are  made  a  "  new  creation  "  is  no 
exception.  But  to  be  born  of  the  Spirit  is  not  the 
same  thing  as  to  receive  the  Spirit.  Baptism  is 
related  to  Confirmation  as  the  breathing  of  our  Lord 
upon  His  disciples  on  the  evening  of  His  resurrection 
was  related  to  the  outpouring  of  Pentecost.  If  ever 
the  Church  speaks  of  the  Holy  Ghost  being  given 
in  Baptism,  apart  from  Confirmation,  she  expressly 
defines  the  extent  of  the  gift :  Give  Thy  Holy  Spirit 
to  this  infant  that  he  may  be  born  again."  It  would 
have  been  inaccurate  to  ask  for  the  gift  without  that 
limitation.  Strict  theology,  following  the  language 
of  Scripture,  connects  such  terms  as  giving,  and 
receiving,  and  having  the  Spirit,  the  Spirit  falling  on 
a  man,  and  dwelling  in  him,  and  making  him  His 
temple,  and  being  shed  abroad  in  his  heart,  sealing, 
and  anointing  him,  with  Confirmation,  not  with 
Baptism  by  itself.  We  are  quickened  into  new  and 
eternal  and  Divine  life  by  the  first  act  which  ushers 


300     Nature  of  the  Confirmation  Gift. 


us  into  the  Body  of  Christ ;  the  rudiments  of  new 
faculties  are  imparted  to  us,  which  are  called  ''the 
powers  of  the  world  to  come  "  (Heb.  vi.  5) ;  we  begin 
at  once  to  be  subject  to  heavenly  motions  from  the 
Holy  Ghost,  such  as  the  unbaptized  cannot  be  said  to 
experience;  but  not  immediately  does  the  Spirit  of 
Christ  take  possession  of  us  and  flood  our  inward 
selves  with  His  penetrating  presence.  Even  Christ 
Himself,  whose  Nativity  in  some  degree  corresponded 
to  our  regeneration,  did  not  receive  the  complete 
unction  of  the  Spirit  till  many  years  later. 

Ill-instructed  Christians  often  suppose  that  the  gift 
of  the  Holy  Ghost,  which  was  at  first  bestowed  by  the 
laying  on  of  hands,  consisted  in  the  power  to  speak 
with  tongues  and  prophesy,  or  to  work  miracles, 
because  we  sometimes  read  that  the  first  effect  of  the 
gift  was  to  make  the  recipients  break  forth  into  such 
actions.  Or  if  it  is  recognised  that  a  gift  of  which  so 
much  is  made  could  not  be  of  so  superficial  and  poor  a 
nature,  men  suppose  that  to  receive  the  Holy  Ghost 
must  necessarily  involve  becoming  holy.  But  this  is 
to  confuse  the  gift  with  its  effects.  Startling  results 
at  first  accompanied  the  reception  of  the  gift,  in  order 
to  convince  the  recipients  and  others  of  the  reality  of 
what  was  given.  These  results  are  no  longer 
produced,  because  we  believe  without  them.  The 
absence  of  miracles  and  tongues  does  not  make  us 
doubt  the  presence  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  Even  an  evil 
life  is  no  proof  that  the  Holy  Ghost  is  not  there.  S. 
Paul  expressly  rebukes  the  Corinthians  for  living 
profligate  lives  while  they  knew,  all  the  time,  that  the 


Gifts  and  Fi'tdts  of  the  Spirit.  301 


Holy  Ghost  was  within  them  (1  Cor.  vi.  19).  It  only 
shews  that  the  gift,  though  received,  has  been  thus  far 
received  in  vain.  No  gift  of  God  takes  away  the 
man's  responsibility  for  using  it  rightly,  and  it  is  quite 
possible  for  the  Holy  Ghost  to  lie  in  a  man's  heart 
without  effect.  The  simplest  account  of  this  matter  is 
really  the  truest.  What  we  receive  in  Confirmation 
is  not  an  operation  or  influence  of  God,  but  the  living 
and  personal  Spirit  Himself.  He  enters  into  a  new 
relation  with  us  thereby,  and  lodges  Himself  close  by 
the  springs  of  our  thought  and  desire,  to  make  of  us 
what  we  will  allow  Him  to  make. 

Behind  all  special  manifestations  of  His  grace  lie 
the  great  universally  needed  gifts.  Of  these,  seven 
are  usually  enumerated,  all  of  which  are  forms  of 
enlightened  spiritual  and  moral  consciousness.  By 
this  inward  teaching,  which  not  only  sets  the  truth 
before  us  as  an  object,  but  quickens  our  own  faculties 
to  perceive  it,  the  Holy  Ghost  sanctifies  us.  The  seven- 
fold gifts  should  bear  fruit  in  a  company  of  virtues, 
the  various  grouping  of  which  in  different  souls  makes 
the  difference  of  character,  and  exhibits  the  manifold 
artistic  skill  of  the  indwelling  Spirit.  "  To  every  man 
severally  as  He  wills"  (1  Cor.  xii.  11),  He  divides 
^  the  particular  grace  appropriate  to  the  man  himself 
and  to  his  function  in  the  society.  Those  individual- 
ising features  of  grace  are  sometimes  called  charismata, 
or  bounties  in  a  definite  shape.  No  man  who  has 
been  confirmed  is  without  some  charisma,  which 
becomes  his  contribution  to  the  general  wealth  of  the 
Church. 


302 


Modes  of  Confirming. 


Confirmation  is  often  called  a  Sealing.  In  all 
probability  this  is  on  account  o£  its  relation  to  Holy- 
Baptism.  Sealing  is  not  a  first  but  a  second  act ;  and 
in  Confirmation  God's  seal  is  set  to  what  has  already 
been  done.  It  is  the  Amen  "  to  the  already  uttered 
'^Yea"  (2  Cor.  i.  20-22).  But  it  is  more  than  the 
ratification  o£  an  act ;  it  is  the  sealing  of  persons 
(Eph.  iv.  30).  We  ourselves  are  thereby  indelibly 
marked  as  being  God's  own  by  a  special  consecration. 
That  consecration  is  set  forth  also  under  the  figure  of 
Unction,  because  in  Confirmation  we,  in  our  degree, 
are  consecrated  to  the  same  kind  of  office  as  our  Lord 
Himself,  to  be  prophets  and  priests  and  kings  in  tlie 
world,  under  Him. 

§  11. 

It  is  a  pity  that  the  prominence  anciently  given 
to  this  last  thought  has  been  lost  in  the  English 
Church  by  discontinuing  the  use  of  oil  in  Confirma- 
tion. Nevertheless  the  laying  on  of  hands  is  certainly 
an  apostolic  way  of  administering  the  Spirit,  and  it 
is  not  clear  that  the  actual  use  of  oil  accompanied  the 
imposition  in  the  very  first  days,  although  it  soon 
came  to  be  regarded  as  an  integral  part  of  the 
Sacrament.  We  are  therefore  in  at  least  as  good  a 
position  with'  regard  to  this  ordinance  as  some  other 
ancient  Churches,  which  have  retained  unction  but 
liavc  lost  the  laying  on  of  hands. 

Tliis  ministration  belongs  exclusively  to  the  first 
order  in  tlie  Church.  Following  the  precedent  of 
apostolic  days  (Acts  viii.  14),  the  Cliurcli  permits  none 


Confirmation  precedes  Com7mm{on.  303 


but  bishops  to  confirm,  altliough  local  usage  has  some- 
times varied  upon  the  point.  In  the  Eastern  Church, 
where  unction  alone  is  used,  the  priest  is  permitted 
to  confirm,  but  only  with  oil  specially  prepared  by  the 
bishop. 

While  the  East  also  administers  the  rite  to  infants 
along  with  Baptism,  the  West,  by  an  important  stretch 
of  authority,  separates  it  from  Baptism  in  the  case  of 
infants,  and  defers  it  till  the  recipient  has  "  come  to 
years  of  discretion."  Confirmation  is  thefi  wisely 
preceded  by  a  previous  examination  of  the  candidate 
touching  his  baptismal  vows,  to  make  sure  of  his 
being  duly  qualified  to  receive  so  great  a  gift.  None 
are  admitted,  in  ordinary  circumstances,  to  Communion 
until  they  have  been  confirmed,  because,  as  S.  Basil 
says,  "  The  man  who  comes  to  the  Communion  Avithout 
understanding  the  principle  on  which  the  participation 
of  the  Lord's  Body  and  Blood  is  given,  derives  no 
benefit  from  it."  The  saint  is  not  indeed  giving  this 
as  a  reason  for  the  priority  of  Confirmation ;  but  as 
that  which  is  Christ's  can  only  be  shewn  to  us  by  the 
Spirit,  who  alone  searches  the  depths  of  God,  it  is 
natural  that  we  should  first  seek  the  Spirit's  enlighten- 
ment before  we  approach  so  deep  a  mystery  as  the 
Sacrament  of  the  Altar.  . 

§  12. 

The  fundamental  idea  embodied  in  the  Holy  Com- 
munion is  that  of  our  perpetual  dependence  upon  the 
Incarnate  Lord  for  support.  This  idea  is  set  forth  in 
the  discourses  of  our  Lord  at  Capernaum,  just  as  the 


304        Christ  our  Meat  and  Drink. 


fundamental  idea  of  Baptism  is  set  forth  in  the  con- 
versation with  Nicodemus.  It  is  not  enough  that  we 
have  once  for  all  been  brought  into  life,  eternal  life, 
by  Him.  Our  eternal  life  is  not  so  made  over  to  us  in 
our  regeneration  that  we  become  independent  centres 
of  it,  thenceforth  drawing  only  upon  ourselves.  We 
are  still  compelled  to  resort  for  our  nutriment  to  the 
same  source  from  which  our  life  was  originally  con- 
veyed to  us,  namely,  Christ.  The  relationship  in 
which  we  stand  to  Him,  Christ  compares  to  the 
relationship  in  which  He  stands  to  the  Father, 
Although  the  Son  "has  life  in  Himself"  (S.  John  v. 
26),  not  merely  the  contingent  existence  of  a  creature, 
yet  He  tells  us  that  even  in  Him  that  life  is  not  inde- 
pendent of  its  sole  and  everlasting  source  :  "  I  live 
because  of  the  Father  "  (S.  John  vi.  57).  And  as  He 
lives  by  a  perpetual  absorbing  into  Himself  of  the 
entire  fulness  of  the  Father,  so  we  live  by  a  perpetual 
absorbing  into  ourselves  of  so  much  of  the  fulness  of 
the  Son  as  we  are  capable  of  receiving.  The  life  of 
God  Himself  is  beyond  our  reach,  and  we  cannot  draw 
upon  it  directly ;  but  it  is  stored  for  us,  as  in  a  bound- 
less reservoir,  in  the  person  of  the  Son,  and  the  Son 
lias  brouf^ht  it  down  to  us  in  His  Incarnation,  and — 
because  we  are  fallen — ^lias  made  a  way  for  us  to 
appropriate  it  still  more  surely  and  copiously  in  His 
Passion. 

These  thoughts  arc  set  forth  to  us  under  the 
language  of  eating  and  drinking.  But  it  must  be 
remembered  by  those  who  would  g(;t  at  the  heart  of 
the  matter,  that  even  the  eating  and  drinking  which 


Mystery  of  Eating  and  Drinking,  305 

supports  our  natural  life  is  a  profound  mystery,  and 
that  it  proceeds  from  the  same  Creator  who  now  uses 
it  in  the  Church  for  a  great  spiritual  purpose.  It  is 
not  too  much  to  say  that  our  very  constitution  has 
been  devised  with  a  view  to  this  great  spiritual  pur- 
pose, and  that  Christ  did  not  merely  adapt,  as  an 
afterthought,  a  thing  which  He  happened  to  find 
ready  to  hand.  Our  natural  constitution  is  such 
that  we  cannot  subsist  in  isolation.  In  order  to 
maintain  life,  we  are  compelled  to  eat, — that  is,  to 
take  into  ourselves  and  assimilate  a  substance  which 
is  not  our  own.  We  are  kept  in  a  constant  union 
with  surrounding  nature.  Seeds,  and  herbs,  and 
animals,  yield  up  their  lives,  and  minister  to  the 
sustenance  of  ours.  How  it  is  done,  science  is  unable 
to  explain  to  us,  for,  as  yet  at  least,  it  has  no  certainty 
what  life  is.  How  the  dead  material  particles,  which 
made  up  something  else,  become  part  of  ourselves 
and  instinct  with  our  own  life  which  they  have  gone 
to  support,  is  an  unexplained  wonder,  although  so 
common  and  universal  that  we  seldom  pause  to  think 
upon  it.  The  eating  by  which  our  bodies  are  kept 
alive  is  an  enigma  in  the  very  framework  of  nature. 
It  receives  its  answer  in  those  sayings  of  Christ  in 
which,  in  a  wonderful  progress.  He  sets  forth  His  own 
relation  to  men.  "  Work  for  the  food  which  abideth 
unto  eternal  life,  which  the  Son  of  Man  will  give 
you;  for  Him  the  Father  sealed  (or  solemnly  con- 
secrated to  this  purpose),  even  God."  "The  bread 
of  God  is  that  which  cometh  down  out  of  heaven  and 
giveth  life  to  the  world."    "  I  am  the  bread  of  life." 

X 

I 


3o6    Chidst  truly  received  in  the  Eucharist. 


And  the  bread,  moreover,  which  I  will  give,  is,  for 
the  sake  of  the  life  of  the  world.  My  flesh."  "  Verily, 
verily,  I  say  unto  you,  except  ye  eat  the  flesh  of  the 
Son  of  Man,  and  drink  His  blood,  ye  have  not  life  in 
yourselves."  "  As  the  living  Father  sent  Me,  and  I 
live  because  of  the  Father,  so  he  that  eateth  Me,  he 
also  shall  live  because  of  Me"  (S.  John  vi.  27,  33,  35, 
51,  53,  57). 

These  words  were  thrown  out  by  our  Lord  for 
faith  to  ponder ;  and  then,  a  year  later,  "  on  the  same 
night  in  which  He  was  betrayed,"  they  were — not 
indeed  explained,  for  the  mystery  of  them  Avas 
deepened — ^but  gathered  up,  and  put  into  visible 
form,  and  commended  to  the  Church,  until  Christ 
should  come  again,  in  the  institution  of  the  most  Holy 
Eucharist. 

§13. 

After  what  has  been  said  on  the  nature  of  Sacra- 
ments in  general,  it  will  not  be  necessary  to  state  that 
the  Eucharist  is  no  mere  repetition  of  the  ideas 
above  set  forth,  only  expressed  in  symbol  instead 
of  language.  It  is  a  symbol  which  actually  con- 
veys to  the  believer  the  thing  symbolized.  To  use 
our  Lord's  own  expression,  we  "  eat  Him "  in  this 
Divine  mystery, — and  that,  not  merely  by  devout 
memory  and  meditation,  not  merely  by  a  subjec- 
tive act  of  faith  and  love  such  as  might  be  made 
at  other  times  and  places,  but  "  verily  and  indeed," 
because  He  chooses  in  this  Sacrament  "verily  and 
indeed "  to  bestow  His  own  self  upon  us.    That  Ho 


Utility  of  further  Investigation.  307 


does  so  is  the  main  thing  which  faith  requires  to 
know ;  and  it  was  the  wisdom  of  Hooker  to  rest  upon 
this  his  famous,  though  insufficient,  Eirenikon  between 
contending  parties  of  believers.  Eomans,  Anglicans, 
Orientals,  Lutherans,  even  Calvinists,  all  sincerely 
maintain  that  the  true-hearted  communicant  is  there- 
by made  really,  by  the  operation  of  the  Holy  Ghost, 
to  partake  of  the  living  Christ.  All  these  alike  are 
agreed,  when  they  speak  with  deliberation,  that  the 
blessing  received  by  the  faithful  is  no  creation  of  their 
faith,  no  image  formed  within  them  of  something 
which  is  after  all  not  there,  but  a  thing  truly  conveyed 
into  them  from  without,  a  movement  by  which  our 
Incarnate  Saviour  plants  Himself, — His  Personal  self, 
— in  our  most  inward  parts.  Where  this  is  adoringly 
believed,  there  ought  to  be  no  insuperable  hindrance  to 
reunion.  All  else  which  we  have  to  say  upon  the  sub- 
ject is  but  the  working  out  into  detail  of  this  central 
truth  ;  and  it  will  be  far  better  for  the  soul  and  for 
the  Church  that  the  detail  should  be  forgotten  and 
the  central  truth  firmly  held,  than  that  there  should 
be  a  clear  and^exhaustive  understanding  of  the  minutiae 
of  the  doctrine,  equally  removed  from  superstition 
and  from  scepticism,  without  a  living  grasp  of  the 
personal  Christ. 

Yet  solid  unity  is  never  reached  by  agreeing  to 
inquire  no  further,  but  rather  by  investigating  as 
deeply  as  possible  in  a  spirit  of  reverence  and  charity, 
and  bearing  patiently  with  all  who  work  in  a  kindred 
spirit,  even  where  their  present  conclusions  seem 
erroneous.     In  svich  a  spirit  we  would  point  out 


3o8    The  Calvinistic  Doctrine  Insufficient. 


candidly  where  others  appear  to  have  gone  wrong, 
not  for  the  sake  of  controversy  and  criticism,  but 
because  the  examination  of  what  looks  like  an  error 
is  often  the  most  efiective  way  of  coming  to  the  truth. 

The  Church,  then,  is  dissatisfied  with  the  doctrine 
of  the  purely  Spiritual  Presence,  as  taught  by  the 
Calvinists  and  propagated  in  England  (for  example) 
by  Jeremy  Taylor.  In  its  reaction  from  what  was 
felt  to  be  a  carnal  and  materialistic  view,  this  doctrine 
falls  into  the  error  of  undervaluing  the  true  con- 
nexion between  the  outward  and  the  inward.  It 
appears  to  forget  that  our  Lord  is  not  only  alive  from 
the  dead,  but  is  risen  again  in  a  glorified  body,  and 
that  our  own  future  glory  is  to  be  one  not  of  naked 
sj)irituality,  but  of  spirit  befittingly  embodied.  If 
anything  is  clear  in  our  Lord's  teaching,  and  in  the 
doctrine  of  the  Incarnation  in  general,  it  is  that  our 
Lord's  humanity  is  the  medium  through  which  men 
receive  His  Divinity,  and  not  His  Divinity  the  medium 
through  which  they  receive  His  humanity.  This  is 
ignored  in  the  Calvinistic  doctrine.  In  its  eager- 
ness to  reach  that  which,  assuredly,  is^the  supreme 
object,  it  dismisses  with  something  like  disdainful  im- 
patience, both  the  Sacrament  under  which  our  Lord 
is  pleased  to  clothe  His  coming,  and  the  sacred 
Flesh  or  Body,  which  in  His  own  language  is  the 
special  thing  signified  by  the  Sacrament ;  it  looks  only 
to  a  spiritual  action  upon  our  spirits,  not  to  one  which 
deals  with  our  whole  complex  nature,  with  its  bodily 
as  well  as  spiritual  organization.  No  real  diflference 
is  made  between  the  Eucharistic  Presence  of  Christ 


The  Doch^iite  of  1 7'ansubstantiation.  309 


and  the  receiving  o£  the  Holy  Ghost.  I£  men  of  this 
persuasion  turn  aside  to  acknowledge  that  we  are 
made  partakers  o£  Christ's  sacred  flesh  at  all,  they 
acknowledge  it  only  as  a  consequence  o£  our  having 
already  been  made  partakers  o£  the  still  greater  gift. 
In  this  way  the  true  notion  of  a  Sacrament  is  lost, 
and  what  we  have  called  the  Nestorian  notion  comes 
in.  The  doctrine  lacks  the  simplicity  of  Gospel  faith. 
The  connexion  between  the  Sacrament  and  that  of 
which  it  is  the  Sacrament  is  made  purely  arbitrary 
and  conventional.  The  consecration  of  the  Eucharistic 
elements  has  no  other  effect  than  to  set  them  apart  to 
serve  as  symbols  in  a  transaction  to  which  they  are  not 
actually  necessary.  All  that  is  of  real  value,  besides 
a  profession  of  faith  and  a  recognition  of  Church 
fellowship,  is  an  act  of  inward  appropriation  by  the 
communicant  of  an  invisible  grace  which  is,  after  all, 
only  nominally  attached  to  the  sacramental  elements. 
And  if  a  devout  enquirer  should  ask,  what  that  is 
which  lies  upon  the  altar  between  the  consecration 
and  the  act  of  communion,  the  answer  would  hardly 
be  an  ex  animo  quotation  of  our  Lord's  words,  This 
is  My  Body." 

Opposed  to  this  conception  of  the  Eucharistic 
Presence,  as  Eutychianism  is  opposed  to  Nestorianism, 
stands  the  scholastic  dogma  of  Transubstantiation. 
This,  too,  as  the  Article  says,  overthroweth  the 
nature  of  a  Sacrament."  The  bread  and  wine,  ac- 
cording to  this  theory,  at  the  touch  of  that  more 
glorious  Substance  which  takes  possession  of  them, 
pass  out  of  existence  and  are  lost,  leaving  behind 


3IO       It  rests  on  a  false  Philosophy. 


nothing  but  shadowy  appearances  of  themselves, 
which  serve  to  indicate  the  Presence  o£  something 
else  instead.  Such  a  doctrine  is  capable  o£  being 
stated  in  ravishing  terms,  and  it  was  indeed  first 
formulated  with  the  best  intention.  It  appeared 
to  guard  the  true  honour  of  the  Sacrament  of  the 
Altar,  to  afford  a  clear  position  on  which  the  intellect 
could  repose,  and  to  bring  the  Presence  of  Christ  into 
the  midst  of  His  people  in  an  indisputable  way.  But 
nevertheless  it  loses,  like  Eutychianism,  some  rich 
elements  of  truth,  and  so  imperils  the  rest.  Our  first 
objection  to  the  dogma  is  that  it  is  based  upon  a 
discarded  philosophy.  It  is  questionable  whether 
any  well-instructed  thinker  of  the  present  day  holds 
the  metaphysical  theory  of  substance  and  accidents 
which  it  perpetuates.  That  theory  is  not  itself  defide, 
even  in  the  Roman  communion,  apart  from  the 
doctrine  of  the  Eucharist.  Possibly  some  assembly 
of  competent  scholars  from  that  communion  might  be 
given  liberty  to  revise  the  terms  in  which  their 
doctrine  of  the  Eucharist  is  couched,  and,  while 
preserving  the  essential  thought  which  the  Councils 
of  Lateran  and  Trent  aimed  at  expressing,  to  clothe 
it  in  formulas  less  crude,  and  therefore  more  in 
liarmony  with  tlie  advance  of  scientific  knowledge,  as 
well  as  with  spiritual  insight.  Meanwhile,  even  if  the 
philosophy  of  Transubstantiation  were  tenable,  the 
miracle  which  would  be  involved  in  it  would  be  unique 
among  Divine  actions.  God  does  not  usually  deceive 
our  senses ;  nor  is  it  His  method  to  annihilate  what 
He  has  made,  in  the  way  that — according  to  the 


Transubstantiation  tinnecessary,       3 1 1 


Eoman  doctrine — the  substance  of  the  bread  is 
annihilated.  He  treasures  every  atom  of  His  universe. 
If  indeed  there  were  no  other  way  of  obtaining  as  rich 
and  full  a  meaning  from  our  Lord's  words  about  the 
Sacrament,  such  an  objection  might  soon  be  disposed 
of ;  but  if  the  same  meaning  can  be  retained  by  some 
other  method  of  interpretation,  we  shall  give  the 
greater  glory  to  God  by  not  discrediting  our  divinely 
given  senses,  and  by  setting  a  more  reverent  value 
even  upon  the  material  creation,  with  which  God  has 
so  closely  associated  us.  There  is  an  alternative. 
Nothing  binds  us  to  accept  the  mediaeval  explanation, 
or  evasion,  of  the  mystery.  Our  Lord's  words,  This 
is  My  Body,"  do  not  require  us  to  choose  between 
scholastic  Transubstantiation  and  some  figure  of  speech. 
The  thing  which  we  see  can  be  something  more  than 
we  see  it  to  be.  When  S.  Thomas  bowed  down  before 
the  Figure  whose  hands  and  side  he  was  invited  to 
handle,  and  cried,  "  My  Lord  and  my  God,"  he  did  not 
deny  that  what  he  was  bidden  to  touch  was  a  true 
substantial  human  body,  nor  even  that  it  was  a  body 
composed  of  particles  of  carbon  and  hydrogen ;  but  he 
felt  that  it  was  vitally  united  with  something  greater 
than  itself  ;  it  was  not  an  illusory  set  of  "  accidents  " 
caught  up  to  serve  as  the  mere  symbol  of  a  Presence, 
but  a  thing  which,  with  no  fear  of  idolatry,  he  could 
fall  down  and  worship,  because,  though  he  did  not 
see  the  Divinity,  yet  what  he  saw  was  his  Lord  and 
his  God.  So  may  we  feel  when  Christ  says  to  us, 
"  Take,  eat ;  this  is  My  Body." 

The  Church  of  England  is  not  committed  to  the 


312     Teaching  of  the  Anglican  Article. 


opinions  of  any  single  doctor,  or  group  of  doctors, 
whether  of  the  sixteenth  or  of  any  other  century. 
Nevertheless  it  is  a  happy  thing  that  the  Providence 
of  God  has  preserved  for  us  clear  evidence  of  the 
thoughts  which  were  in  the  hearts  of  those  who 
framed  our  present  formularies  on  this  subject. 
When  our  Articles  were  drawn  up,  Cheney,  Bishop 
of  Gloucester — a  man  who  had  risked  his  life  under 
Mary  by  staying,  when  others  fled,  and  opposing  in 
his  place  in  Convocation  the  doctrine  of  Transub- 
stantiation, — protested  strongly  against  that  which 
is  now  the  XXVIIIth  Article.  He  disapproved  of 
saying  that  in  the  Eucharist  the  Body  of  Christ 
is  given,  taken,  and  eaten,  only  after  an  heavenly 
and  spiritual  manner."  He  proceeded  to  allege 
Guest,  Bishop  of  Rochester,  who  was  then  absent, 
as  feeling  the  same  disapproval.  Thereupon,  Guest 
wrote  to  Cecil,  "  I  suppose  you  have  heard  how  the 
Bishop  of  Gloucester  found  himself  grieved  with 
the  placing  of  this  adverb,  '  only,'  .  .  .  because  it  did 
take  away  the  presence  of  Christ's  Body  in  the 
Sacrament,  and  privately  noted  me  to  take  his  part 
therein,  and  yesterday,  in  my  absence,  more  plainly 
vouched  me  for  the  same.  Whereas,  between  him 
and  me,  I  told  him  plainly  that  this  word  '  only '  in 
the  aforesaid  Article  did  not  exclude  the  Presence  of 
Christ's  Body  from  tlic  Sacrament,  but  only  tlie 
grossness  and  sensibleness  in  the  receiving  thereof ; 
for  I  said  unto  him,  though  lie  take  Christ's  Body 
in  his  hand,  received  it  with  his  mouth,  and  that 
coj'porally,  naturally,  really,  substantially,  and  carnally, 


The  Doctrine  of  the  Eastern  Church.    3 1 3 


as  the  doctors  do  write,  yet  did  he  not,  for  all  that,  see 
it,  feel  it,  smell  it,  or  taste  it.  And,  therefore,  I  told 
him  I  would  speak  against  him  herein,  and  the  rather 
because  the  Article  was  of  my  own  penning.  And 
yet  I  would  not,  for  all  that,  deny  anything  that  I  had 
spoken  for  the  Presence."  If  Bishop  Guest's  interpre- 
tation of  his  own  Article  may  be  considered  to  repre- 
sent faithfully  the  teaching  of  the  Eeformed  Church 
of  England,  it  will  be  evident  that  Transubstantiation 
was  not  rejected  because  men  shrank  from  a  full  belief 
in  the  Sacramental  Presence.  It  was  because  the 
manner  of  the  Presence  had  been  defined  in  a  way  not 
only  unnecessary,  but  liable  to  be  painfully  mis- 
understood. In  order  to  protect,  and  preserve,  and 
commend,  the  Catholic  belief  about  the  Eucharistic 
Presence,  it  was  necessary  to  be  rid  of  the  modern 
definitions  which  had  obscured  it. 

It  is  possible  that  in  this  great  matter  the  Eastern 
Church  may  be  able  to  mediate  between  the  divergent 
utterances  of  the  West.  The  Eastern  Church,  while 
accepting  (at  a  late  date)  the  word  Transubstantiation, 
has  never  imported  into  it  the  scholastic  metaphysics, 
with  those  notions  of  one  substance  going  and  another 
coming  in  its  place,  which  often  in  Roman  language 
suggest  something  more  like  human  dexterity  than 
the  mighty  works  of  God.  Eastern  theologians  are 
careful  to  point  out,  that  the  word,  as  they  use  it, 
offers  no  explanation  of  the  mode  of  change, — which 
in  their  judgment  would  be  foolish  and  irreligious, — 
and  that  it  is  only  used  to  exclude  those  opinions 
which  would  connect  the  elements  with  the  Body  and 


314     Teaching  of  S.  Gregory  of  Nyssa. 


Blood  of  Christ  by  nothing  more  than  a  link  of 
thought,  or  (as  in  the  Lutheran  view)  by  local  inter- 
penetration.  Perhaps  no  better  general  line  can  be 
taken.  It  accords  well  with  the  teaching  of  the 
Fathers, — among  whom,  amidst  the  widest  range  of 
expression,  there  may  be  said  to  be  at  least  a  consent 
in  the  doctrine  of  S.  Justin  Martyr,  that  the  Eucharist 
is  no  longer  "common  bread  or  common  drink." 
When  the  consecration  is  accomplished,  the  bread  and 
wine  do  not  remain  simply  what  they  were  before.  An 
unspeakable  change  has  come  upon  them,  by  the 
overshadowing  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  The  change 
cannot  be  defined  in  the  language  of  human  schools. 
No  metaphysical  terms  can  set  it  forth.  But  those 
elements  have  been  taken  into  a  new  relation  to  the 
Person  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  Himself,  even  as  the 
substance  of  our  flesh,  in  the  womb  of  the  Blessed 
Virgin,  Avas  taken.  It  does  not  satisfy  the  heart  to 
tell  us  that  they  serve  a  new  purpose,  or  have  a  new 
meaning  for  us,  or  that  they  have  undergone  a  virtual 
or  even  a  spiritual  change.  This  language  sounds 
distant  and  cold.  The  change  is  not  only  spiritual ; 
it  is  vital.  S.  Gregory  of  Nyssa,  though  in  confused 
sentences,  seems  to  set  forth  this  thought,  when  he 
reminds  us  that  our  Lord,  when  on  earth,  lived  by 
bread,  and  that  the  bread,  wliich  it  pleased  Him  to 
partake  of,  was  joined  to  His  Body  and  became  His 
Body,  and  that  sucli  a  vital  union  as  He  tlien  effected 
with  the  material  elements  in  one  way,  He  now  effects 
in  a  liigher  way,  for  our  benefit,  in  tlie  Sacrament. 
There,  tlie  grace  of  the  Word  made  for  itself  a  lioly 


Christ's  Body  no  longer    Natural!'  315 


Body,  composed  out  of  the  bread  which  it  ate,  and  so 
in  a  kind  of  way  being  itself  bread ;  here,  likewise,  the 
bread,  as  the  Apostle  says,  '  is  sanctified  by  the  Word 
of  God  and  prayer,'  not  passing  into  the  Body  of  the 
Word  through  eating  and  drinking,  but  being  directly 
made  what  it  was  not  before  (evOvc  fxeraTrotovjuevog)  the 
Body  of  the  Word,  as  it  hath  been  said  by  the  Word 
Himself, '  This  is  My  Body.' "  Thus  the  miracle  wrought 
by  the  Holy  Ghost  at  the  Christian  altar  is  of  a  kind 
at  once  more  lofty  and  more  natural  than  that  which 
the  mediaeval  schools  imagined,  and  the  Real  Presence 
of  the  glorified  Lord  is  assured  to  us  in  all  its  fulness 
without  need  to  do  violence  to  any  of  our  faculties. 

§  14. 

This  doctrine  does  not  involve  the  difficulty  which 
has  often  been  alleged  (with  more  or  less  ignorance) 
against  Roman  teaching,  namely,  that  Christ's  Body 
cannot  be  in  heaven  and  on  earth  at  the  same  time. 
The  objection  has  even  found  its  way,  by  a  curious 
history,  to  a  place  within  the  Prayer-book,  in  the 
so-called  "  Black  Rubric,"  which  was  not  the  work  of 
careful  theologians,  and  which  has  hardly  the  same 
authority  as  other  rubrics.  Two  mischievous  falla- 
cies underlie  the  objection  as  there  verbally  stated, — - 
although,  doubtless,  the  intended  meaning  is  correct 
enough.  Christ's  Body  is  no  longer  a  natural "  body 
after  the  fashion  of  ours.  It  is  a  spiritual "  body. 
And  heaven  is  not  a  distant  place,  but  a  Divinely 
exalted  state.  To  say,  therefore,  that  "  Christ's  natural 
Body  is  in  heaven  "  must  be  regarded  as  only  a  clumsy 


3i6    //  is  received  in  a  Heavenly  Marnier. 


way  of  saying  that  it  has  ceased  to  be  a  natural  body, 
and  has  received  conditions  of  freedom  and  glory 
which  are  out  of  the  reach  of  our  knowledge.  A  man 
who  doubts  whether  our  Lord  still  has  a  body,  doubts 
the  Christian  faith;  but  it  would  be  rash  in  the 
extreme  for  any  one  to  transfer  to  that  Body  in  its 
present  state  all  that  is  gathered  up  for  us  in  the 
notion  of  place.  It  is  impossible  to  tell  whether  a 
glorified  spiritual  body  is  in  local  relations  with  any- 
thing at  all,  except  at  the  will  of  him  whose  body  it 
is.  Still  less  can  we  tell  with  how  many  things  at 
the  same  time  it  can  enter  into  local  relations, — 
especially  in  the  case  of  Him  who  "  fills  all  things 
(Eph.  iv.  10).  If,  however,  the  difficulty  thus  clumsily 
put  be  explained  to  mean  that  Christ  s  Body  cannot 
be  at  the  same  time  in  two  states,  a  heavenly  and  an 
earthly,  the  Church  would  gladly  admit  it.  Christ's 
Body  is  in  no  way  brought  down  or  back  from  its 
heavenly  condition  when  set  before  us  in  the  Sacra- 
ment. It  is  certainly  not  there  in  such  a  way  as  to 
exclude  it  from  glory  in  its  own  present  condition. 
There  it  is,  not  as  it  was  when  Christ  was  living  upon 
earth, — still  less  as  it  was  when  He  hung  dead  on  the 
Cross,  but  as  it  is  at  the  right  hand  of  God.  In  this 
wonderful  mystery,  we,  who  arc  still  pilgrims  here 
below,  arc  permitted  to  feed,  though  with  blindfolded 
eyes,  upon  that  which  will  openly  be  our  sustenance 
hereafter,  the  true  Bread  of  Angels.  It  is  a  foretaste 
of  heaven,  given  upon  earth.  He  who  eats  it,  becomes 
already  possessed  of  "  eternal  life  ; and  the  holy  and 
glorified  thing  which  is  communicated  to  his  body, 


* '  Commttnion','  and  ' '  Breaking  of  Bread!'    3 1 7 


carries  with  it  the  assurance  of  the  man  s  own  resur- 
rection (S.  John  vi.  54). 

It  is  much  to  be  observed  that  this  Sacrament  is 
not  only  our  means  of  maintaining  union  with  Christ 
but  also  of  maintaining  union  with  one  another.  The 
two  things  necessarily  go  together.  There  is  no  such 
thing  as  an  attachment  of  isolated  souls  to  Christ 
Each  soul  is  indeed — to  say  the  least  of  it — as  directly 
and  personally  attached  to  Christ  as  if  there  were  no 
other,  and  Christ  is  as  wholly  and  entirely  communi- 
cated to  each  soul  as  if  none  besides  were  to  share  the 
benefit.  That  is,  no  doubt,  what  is  meant  by  saying 
that  the  entire  Body  of  Christ,  and  all  the  fulness  of 
His  Person,  is  in  each  fragment  of  the  Sacrament. 
But  none  can  receive  Christ  as  a  kind  of  private 
property.  We  must  receive  Him  in  unity  and  loving 
fellowship,  or  not  at  all.  The  name  of  Communion 
itself  implies  this  fact.  When  S.  Paul  asks,  "The 
bread  which  we  break,  is  it  not  the  communion  of  the 
Body  of  Christ  ? "  (1  Cor.  x.  16)  he  does  not  mean 
that  it  is  an  act  of  communion  between  the  soul  and 
Christ;  still  less  does  he  mean  that  the  bread  is  a 
medium  for  the  communication  of  Christ's  Body  (an 
interpretation  which  the  Greek  will  not  bear) : — he 
means  that  it  is  our  joint  participation  of  the  Body, 
our  fellowship  in  it.  That  is  why  he  refers  particu- 
larly to,  the  "  breaking "  of  the  bread.  That  most 
significant  action  has  no  reference  to  the  breaking  of 
Christ's  Body  on  the  Cross,  for — as  S.  Chrysostom 
points  out  in  this  connexion — S.  John  emphatically 
records  that  it  was  never  broken  there.   The  breaking 


3i8       It  tinites  us  in  Christ's  Body. 


of  the  bread  is  done  in  order  that  all  may  receive  a  share 
in  one  and  the  same  whole ;  so  that  S.  Paul  pursues, 
"Because  we,  many  as  we  are,  are  one  bread," — or 
rather  "one  loaf,'' — "one  body,  for  we  all  partake 
from  that  one  loaf/'  If  we  may  reverently  conjecture, 
this  was  the  thought  which  prompted  our  Lord  to  use 
at  the  institution  of  the  Sacrament  a  different  word 
from  that  which  He  had  used  at  Capernaum,  and  to 
say,  "  This  is  My  Body,"  not  "  This  is  My  Flesh."  His 
Flesh  is  His  human  nature,  the  principle  by  which  He 
is  man.  It  might  conceivably  have  been  imparted  to 
a  disconnected  aggregate  of  souls.  But  His  Body  is 
the  structural  whole,  the  organism  in  which  He  is 
presented.  It  is  of  that  that  we  all  partake,  and 
partake  together.  We  not  only  receive  the  same 
substance,  but  we  receive  what  forms  an  indissoluble 
unity.  Thus  the  Eucharist  is  the  great  standing 
Sacrament  of  the  Church.  To  take  the  Communion 
is  the  only  known  way  of  claiming  membership  in  the 
Church.  To  be  excommunicated  is  the  suspension  of 
membership.  It  is  by  no  accidental  concurrence  of 
metaphors  that  the  Eucharist  is  Christ's  Body  and  the 
Church  is  Christ's  Body ;  for  the  whole  being  of  the 
Church  is  in  the  Eucharist.  By  it  the  Church  is 
sustained,  and  filled  out,  and  kept  together.  By  it 
Christ  embodies  Himself  in  the  Church  for  action. 
And  when  Christ  offers  us  Himself  at  the  lioly  table, 
saying,  "  This  is  My  Body,"  He  offers  the  Cliurcli  also ; 
and  if  we  uncharitably  disdain  her,  we  cannot  receive 
Him.  However  little  tliis  tliouglit  is  insisted  upon  at 
the  present  day,  it  is  enshrined  in  S.  Paul's  words  to 


Eating  a  Vohmtary  Act.  319 


the  Corinthians  above  cited,  and  forms  a  large  element 
in  the  teaching  of  the  Fathers.  "If  you/'  says  S. 
Austin,  "  are  the  body  of  Christ,  and  members,  then 
the  Mystery  placed  on  the  Lord's  table  is  the  Mystery 
of  yourselves.  Be  what  you  see,  and  receive  what 
you  are." 

The  main  purpose  and  object  of  the  Eucharist  is 
plainly  to  develope  and  strengthen  our  union  with  our 
glorified  Head  and  with  our  fellow  members.  Great 
as  the  baptismal  blessing  of  union  with  and  in  Christ 
is,  we  must  not  think  of  it  as  a  finished  and  stationary 
thing.  Union  with  Christ  is  progressive ;  and  faithful 
communions  do  not  only  preserve  the  once-formed 
bond  from  being  broken,  but  they  make  us  more  and 
more  deeply  to  dwell  in  Christ  and  Christ  in  us.  The 
last  communion  of  a  saint  is  a  much  greater  thing 
than  his  first, — not  that  what  he  receives  is  sub- 
stantially different,  but  because  each  good  communion 
helps  to  give  the  next  a  more  penetrating  eflfect.  The 
initial  union  with  Christ  in  regeneration  is  irrespective 
of  our  wills ;  not  so  the  development  of  it.  That  is 
why  this  Sacrament  takes  the  form  of  eating ;  because 
eating  expresses  more  than  nourishment,  and  more 
than  identification  between  the  eater  and  his  food ; — 
eating  is  essentially  a  voluntary  act.  To  bring  out 
the  voluntary  nature  of  our  effectual  union  with  Him- 
self, Christ,  in  the  discourses  at  Capernaum,  gradually 
substitutes  for  the  ordinary  word  of  eating  {eaOUiv) 
a  word  which  denotes  the  eating  of  dainties,  the  eating 
of  one  who  relishes  what  he  eats  (rpcoyuv).  It  is  truly 
taught,  therefore,  that   the  wicked  eat  not  the  Body 


320         Commtmion  in  Two  Kinds. 


of  Christ  in  the  use  of  the  Lord's  Supper."  The  thing 
offered  to  them  is  identical  with  that  which  is  offered 
to  the  faithful,  but  they  lack  both  the  will  and  the 
power  to  assimilate  it.  Honest  faith,  however  rudi- 
mentary, and  right  intention,  however  weak  in 
practice,  may  count  on  receiving  the  Body  of  Christ ; 
but  the  touch  of  positive  unbelief  and  contempt  and 
disobedience  profanes  the  Sacrament.  The  outraged 
Presence  cannot  and  will  not  enter  where  the  door  of 
the  heart  is  closed  against  it,  and  the  impious  con- 
sumer of  the  desecrated  elements  receives  nothing  but 
an  earnest  of  wrath  and  woe. 

§15. 

Whenever  the  Holy  Eucharist  is  treated  of,  it  is 
instinctively  assumed  that  the  Sacrament  of  the 
Lord's  Body  is  the  chief  thing,  and  the  Sacrament 
of  the  precious  Blood  takes,  as  in  order  of  adminis- 
tration, so  in  order  of  thought,  a  secondary  place. 
It  is  not  so  audacious  a  departure  from  Christ's  in- 
stitution to  withhold  the  Cup  from  the  body  of  the 
faithful,  as  it  would  be  to  withhold  the  Bread. 
Undoubtedly,  in  ancient  days,  the  first  part  of  the 
Sacrament  was  sometimes  administered — as  to  those 
sick  and  in  prison — without  the  second.  It  is  needless, 
however,  to  point  out  how  different  this  is  from  the 
modern  Roman  rule.  S.  Paul  liimself  disjoins  the  two 
in  tliought  when  he  speaks  of  "  eating  the  Bread  or 
drinking  the  Cup  of  the  Lord  "  (1  Cor.  xi.  27),  which 
has  been  held  to  imply  tliat  tlie  one  might  occasion- 
ally be  received  without  tlie  otlier.    If  so,  however, 


We  receive  the  Blood  as  shed.  321 


it  would  naturally  imply  rather  that  the  Cup  might 
be  received  without  the  Bread,  than  the  Bread  without 
the  Cup, — and  no  trace  of  such  a  custom  appears  to 
be  found.  The  very  fact  of  S.  Pauls  disjunction  in 
language,  and  still  more  the  emphatic  interval  which 
Christ  at  the  Last  Supper  made  between  the  two 
parts  of  the  rite,  shews  that  they  cannot  have  one  and 
the  same  meaning.  Our  Lord  would  not  have  ap- 
pointed two  separate  acts,  if  the  second  were  not  to 
convey  a  distinct  benefit  of  its  own.  It  is  reasonable 
to  suppose  that  where  persons  are  debarred,  without 
their  fault,  from  receiving  the  Sacrament  of  Christ's 
Blood,  some  at  least  of  its  benefits  are  conferred 
through  the  faithful  reception  of  His  Body;  but  we 
cannot  guess  what  may,  in  the  long  run,  be  the  result 
to  a  Church  at  large,  where,  on  insufficient  grounds, 
the  Cup  is  systematically  denied  to  the  entire  laity. 

When,  in  defending  a  position  which  would  be 
better  frankly  abandoned,  Roman  theologians  teach 
that  the  Blood  of  Christ  is  already  contained  in  the 
gift  of  His  Body,  they  not ,  only  make  the  Chalice 
superfluous,  but  they  pass  lightly  over  two  important 
truths.  Their  language  too  often  suggests  that  our 
Lord's  Body  is  still  a  body  of  "  flesh  and  blood in  the 
same  sense  as  it  was  on  earth,  although,  according  to 
S.  Paul,  such  a  body  "  cannot  inherit  the  kingdom  of 
God "  (1  Cor.  XV.  50).  And  in  the  second  place  they 
treat  it  as  a  matter  of  little  moment  whether  the 
precious  Blood,  conceived  of  in  this  somewhat  physical 
and  material  way,  is  received  as  still  circulating,  so  to 
speak,  in  our  Saviour  s  veins,  or  whether  it  is  received 

y 


322 


Rihial  Significance  of  Blood. 


by  itself,  as  shed  forth  for  a  beverage  to  the  faithful. 
This  is  the  very  point.  The  gift  of  the  Cup  is  not 
simply  the  gift  of  Christ's  Blood,  but  of  Christ's  Blood 
"  which  is  poured  out  on  behalf  of  many "  (S.  Mark 
xiv.  24).  It  is  a  difficult  thought  to  follow  out,  but 
one  which  ought  to  repay  devout  study. 

The  blood,  according  to  the  ancient  Law, — and  it 
may  be  added,  according  to  our  latest  physical  research 
— '  is  the  life  "  (Deut.  xii.  23) ;  or  still  more  strictly,  it 
is  the  seat  and  medium  of  the  life :  "  The  life  of  the 
flesh  is  in  the  blood"  (Lev.  xvii.  11).  Li  its  course^ 
through  the  body,  it  both  carries  away  impurities 
and  brings  into  every  corner  those  elements  which 
repair  the  waste  of  nature.  If  this  beneficent  work 
of  the  blood  ceases,  the  body  dies.  In  this  way  the 
blood  is  truly  identified  with  the  life  of  the  body. 
When,  therefore,  it  is  drained  out  of  the  body,  the  life 
goes  with  it.  This  was  the  significance  of  its  sacrificial 
use.  The  blood  of  the  victim  meant,  not  the  death  of 
the  victim,  but  its  surrendered  life.  It  was  not  con- 
sidered that  the  life  was  extinguished  and  annihilated 
by  slaughter,  but  only  that  it  was  deprived  of  its 
earthly  activities  and  separated  from  the  natural 
organism  in  which  it  had  been  embodied.  The 
carcase  was  dead ;  but  tlie  blood  was  still  alive.  To 
have  brought  any  portion  of  the  dead  carcase  into  the 
inner  sanctuary  would  have  seemed  to  the  Israelites 
a  horrible  profanation ;  but  it  was  the  appropriate 
destination  of  the  life-blood.  No  other  reason  could 
be  assigned  for  the  slaughter  of  the  victim,  for  God 
has  "no  pleasure  in  the  death  of  liim  that  dieth" 


The  Blood  His  Life  won  through  Death.  323 


(Ezek.  xviii.  32) ;  but  He  has  pleasure  in  the  humble 
surrender  o£  the  guilty  life,  which  acknowledges  that 
it  has  forfeited  earthly  existence,  and  presents  itself 
absolutely  to  Him. 

This  is  what  our  Blessed  Eedeemer  has  done  for 
us.  Once  for  all,  in  acknowledgment  of  the  sins  of 
man,  He  shed  forth  His  Blood.  The  act  was  itself  a 
great  Sacrament,  for  it  was  the  true  pouring  out  of 
His  soul  unto  death"  (Is.  liii.  12),  clothed  in  a  natural 
and  vivid  symbolism,  which  answered  to  all  the 
sacrificial  types  going  before  it,  and  appealed  to  the 
hearts  of  men  for  ever  after.  But  that  was  not  the 
end.  The  typical  high-priests,  when  they  went  into 
the  Holy  of  Holies,  were  forced  to  take  with  them 
"blood  of  others"  (Heb.  ix.  25),  because  there  was 
no  way  of  dislodging  their  own  lives  and  presenting 
them.  It  could  only  be  typically  done.  But  Christ, 
made  an  High-priest  for  ever  in  His  Kesurrection, 
has  passed  into  heaven  for  us,  "through  His  own 
Blood"  (Heb.  ix.  12).  He,  the  Victor  Victim  (as 
S.  Austin  calls  Him),  is  able  for  ever  to  shew  before 
the  Father — not  His  death  only,  nor  His  life  only — • 
but  His  own  indestructible  life  as  enhanced  and  en- 
riched by  having  once  passed  through  death,  and  that 
a  violent  and  voluntary  death  of  sacrifice.  We  need 
not,  we  cannot,  picture  to  ourselves  the  Blessed  Lord, 
like  a  Jewish  high-priest,  sprinkling  upon  a  heavenly 
mercy-seat  some  spiritualised  substance  in  which 
His  life  still  resides,  apart  from  Himself.  His  life  is 
lodged  again  and  for  ever  in  its  proper  organism,  the 
glorified  body.    But  just  as  the  glorified  Body  bears 


324       Its  special  Connexion  with  Sin. 


in  its  presentment  marks  (however  we  are  to  conceive 
of  them)  of  slaughter  (Rev.  v.  6),  so  the  very  principle 
of  the  human  life  which  animates  it  is  profoundly 
modified  by  its  glorious  self-effusion  upon  Calvary. 
Thus  the  "Blood  of  Sprinkling'' — sprinkled  both  on 
the  mercy-seat  and  on  us, — "  which  speaketh  a  more 
excellent  thing  than  Abel "  can,  in  thought,  be  singled 
out  as  a  glory  of  the  Church  distinct  from  "Jesus, 
mediator  of  a  new  testament"  (Heb.  xii.  24).  It  is 
not,  indeed,  apart  from  His  Person,  but  it  gathers  up 
one  vast  benefit  to  be  derived  from  His  Person.  His 
Blood  contains  all  the  virtue  of  His  Passion. 

We  see  from  this  that  the  second  part  of  the 
Eucharist  is  that  which  meets  our  peculiar  need  as 
sinners.  If  men  had  never  fallen,  and  yet  the  Word 
had  been  made  flesh,  we  can  believe  that  something 
like  the  Sacrament  of  the  Body  might  have  been 
given,  but  not  the  Sacrament  of  the  Blood.  And 
so  our  Lord  indicates  in  the  words  of  institution. 
Over  the  Bread,  He  says  nothing  about  suffering  or 
sin.  But  He  expressly  connects  the  Cup  with  the 
remission  of  sins "  (S.  Matt.  xxvi.  28).  The  gift  of 
His  Body,  again,  stands  absolutely,  without  parallel ; 
it  is  more  than  the  reversal  of  a  calamity  or  the 
restitution  of  a  forfeited  blessing.  Tlie  gift  of  His 
Blood  is  introduced  by  a  manifest  contrast  with  the 
covenant  which  condemned  us  ;  it  is  "  the  new  Cove- 
nant in  His  Blood"  (1  Cor.  xi.  25;  Ex.  xxiv.  8).  So 
the  two  parts  of  the  Sacrament  stand  related  to  each 
other  as  the  Incarnation  and  the  Atonement.  And  in 
this  view  the  order  in  which  they  come  is  unspeakably 


The  Ettcharist  a  Sacrifice, 


325 


suggestive.  We  are  not  first  purified  from  our  sins 
and  then  incorporated  into  Christ.  When  we  have 
been  brought  into  the  communion  o£  His  Body,  then 
we  are  in  a  position  to  receive  the  cleansing  action  of 
His  once  outpoured  Blood.  "  We  have  fellowship  one 
with  another," — if,  that  is,  we  fulfil  that  condition 
of  the  communicant,  of  "  walking  in  the  light,'' — and 
the  Blood  of  Jesus  cleanseth  us  from  all  sin  "  (1  John 
i.  7).  Having  been  first  raised  to  partake  of  His 
glorified  humanity,  we  are  then  permitted  to  drink  in 
those  special  properties  of  His  life  with  which  His 
death  has  charged  it.  And  although  the  first  gift  is 
the  wider  and  further-reaching,  no  one  who  has  a 
deep  sense  of  sin  will  feel  that  the  second  is  super- 
fluous or  umieeessarily  emphasizes  the  sinner  s  need. 

§  16. 

From  the  earliest  times  the  Holy  Eucharist  has 
been  regarded  by  the  Church  as  not  only  the  great 
means  by  which  we  are  permitted  to  draw  into  our- 
selves our  glorified  Lord  and  all  His  benefits,  but  also 
as  her  one  appointed  Sacrifice.  So  universally  do  the 
early  Christians  interpret  Malachi's  prophecy  of  a 
pure  and  catholic  Sacrifice  as  referring  to  the  Eucha- 
rist, that  we  cannot  doubt  that  it  was  part  of  the 
Apostles  doctrine  (Mai.  i.  11).  The  word  does  not 
apply  only  to  the  praises  and  thanksgivings  which 
accompany  the  oblation — though  they  form  an  integral 
portion  of  it,  and  are,  indeed,  so  characteristic  of  it  as 
to  establish  its  name  of  Eucharist,  or  Thanksgiving. 
Nor  does  it  apply  only  to  the  alms  which  Christians 


326       The  Church  herself  offered  up. 


have  always  been  accustomed  to  offer  with  it,  and 
which  come  up  as  a  true  "memorial  before  God" 
(Acts  X.  4).  Nor  does  the  sacrifice  consist  only  in  the 
presentation  o£  the  bread  and  wine  which  are  to  be 
used  in  the  Mysteries,  though  ancient  liturgies  invest 
this  presentation  with  great  solemnity.  It  comes 
closer  to  the  point  when  we  consider  "  ourselves,  our 
souls  and  bodies,"  as  the  sacrifice.  A  hasty  reading  of 
S.  Austin,  for  example,  might  almost  lead  to  the  con- 
clusion that  the  saint  knew  of  no  other  sacrifice  in  the 
Eucharist.  He  insists  with  vehement  reiteration  that 
the  Church  is  herself  the  Body  of  Christ  which  is 
offered.  "  This,"  he  says,  "  is  the  Christian  Sacrifice : 
the  many,  one  body  in  Christ.  This  the  Church 
celebrates  in  the  Sacrament  of  the  Altar  with  which 
the  faithful  are  familiar,  where  the  Church  learns  that 
in  that  thing  which  she  offers,  she  is  herself  offered." 
It  does  not  explain  this  Father's  meaning  to  allege 
that  he  is  using  allegorical  or  metaphorical  language. 
What  S.  Austin  says  is  a  real  and  substantial  fact, 
and  no  offering  of  the  Body  of  Christ  can  be  imagined 
now,  which  does  not  include  the  offering  of  all  His 
members  in  their  unity.  But  if  the  Body  of  Christ 
cannot  be  offered  in  sacrifice  without  the  Church,  still 
less  can  the  Church  be  offered  in  sacrifice  without 
tliat  sacred  Thing,  the  partaking  of  which  makes  her 
to  be  Christ's  Body  and  renders  licr  acceptable  to  God. 
The  sacrifice  of  ourselves — as  well  as  of  our  gifts  and 
alms  and  praises — is  the  new  and  additional  element 
in  every  Eucharist ;  but  it  requires  some  other  more 
potent  and  constant  Sacrifice  on  which  to  rest. 


The  Sacrifice  a  MemoriaL  327 


That  which  gives  substance  and  value  to  all  our 
other  offerings  is  the  continual  offering  up  to  God  of 
the  Person  of  Jesus  Christ,  in  His  Body  and  His 
Blood.  Christ  empowered  and  commanded  .His 
Apostles  to  do  this,  when  He  made  the  Eucharist 
His  own  memorial,  as  the  yearly  Passover  which  He 
was  superseding  by  it  was  the  '^memorial"  of  the 
Exodus  (Ex.  xii.  14).  It  should  be  observed,  however, 
that  He  did  not  say,  "  Do  this  for  a  remembrance  of 
My  Death."  The  Eucharist  was  to  be  connected  not 
merely  with  one,  even  the  greatest  and  most  touching, 
of  His  acts,  but  with  Himself.  Now  Christ  cannot  be 
remembered  in  His  Church  as  one  who  is  dead  and 
gone.  He  can  only  be  remembered  as  living  and 
present,  though  out  of  sight ;  and  His  living  Presence 
is  guaranteed  in  the  bread  and  wine  which  He  had 
already  affirmed  to  be  His  Body  and  Blood.  Over 
those  sacred  elements  we  remember  Him,  truly  present 
in  them,  and  gathering  up  in  Himself  all  that  He  has 
done  for  us.  And  what  direction  does  our  remem- 
brance of  Him  take  ?  Not  merely  an  internal  one,  as 
in  meditation.  S.  Paul  speaks  of  it  as  a  proclamation, 
— a  telling  from  age  to  age  and  from  shore  to  shore. 
The  Eucharistic  act  announces  and  re-announces  "  the 
Lord's  death  "  (1  Cor.  xi.  26), — the  death  endured  by 
One  who  is  more  than  man, — and  of  whom  the  act 
itself  bears  witness  that  He  is  alive,  and  that  its 
witness  is  only  needed  until  He  come,"  when  "  re- 
membrance "  will  pass  again  into  sight.  But  the 
Eucharist  cannot  be  regarded  as  simply  an  act  between 
man  and  man ;  and  if  the  remembrance  is  not  only  in 


328      Sacrifice  involves  no  Destruction. 


the  heart,  no  more  is  it  only  amongst  the  members  of 
the  Church.  It  is  a  remembrance  towards  God.  And 
this  is  its  primary  character.  With  thanksgivings  for 
all  God's  mercies, — His  ordinary  gifts  of  food  and 
drink,  His  providential  dealings  with  our  race, — we 
specially  give  thanks  to  Him  for  the  mercies  bestowed 
upon  us  in  Christ,  and  display  to  Him,  and  not  only 
to  one  another,  that  precious  Body  and  Blood  in  which 
all  our  hopes  are  centred.  Such  an  act  is  most  truly 
a  sacrifice.^ 

To  prevent  mistake,  however,  the  first  thing  which 
we  must  clearly  apprehend  in  the  Catholic  doctrine 
of  the  Eucharistic  Sacrifice,  is  that  it  neither  detracts 
from  the  perfectness  of  the  Sacrifice  of  the  Cross,  nor 

^  Many  have  thought  that  the  very  words  "  Do  this  "  are  intended 
to  have  a  sacrificial  meaning,  and  should  rather  be  rendered  *'  Offer 
This."  In  that  case,  of  course,  the  word  "  this "  will  denote  the 
Eucharistic  Bread  and  Cup  respectively,  and  not  the  Eucharistic 
action  ;— "  Offer  this  Thing,"  not  "  Perform  this  action."  The  Greek 
word  for  "  do  "  {ttoiCiv)  is  constantly  so  used  in  the  Old  Testament : — 
for  instance,  where  we  are  obliged  to  say, I  will  offer  bullocks  and 
goats"  (Ps.  Ixvi.  13),  the  Septuagint  has,  "I  will  do  bullocks  and 
gnats."  The  word  do  "  in  such  a  connexion  does  not  point  particularly 
to  the  slaughter  of  the  animals,  but  to  the  whole  sacrificial  operation. 
There  would  therefore  be  no  dogmatic  objection  to  such  an  interpreta- 
tion. If  our  Lord  had  wished  to  say,  "  Offer  Tliis,"  without  using  a 
word  of  slaughter,  He  could  scarcely  have  used  other  words  than  those 
which  lie  used.  The  difficult  sentence  in  1  Cor.  xi.  25,  "This  do  as 
often  as  ye  drink,"  would  bo  much  simplified  if  we  could  supply  tho 
same  object  to  both  verbs.  But  the  rendering  "  Offer  this "  has 
against  it  the  fact  that  it  is  of  recent  origin.  All  the  Greek  Fathers, 
with  tlie  exception  of  S.  Justin  Martyr,  treat  the  words  as  meaning, 
*'  Perform  this  action."  Altliough  they  certainly  see  a  sacrificial  con- 
notation in  the  words  as  a  whole,  they  do  not  give  so  much  as  a  hint 
that  another  rendering  of  the  word  "this"  had  occurred  to  them. 
Such  could  hnrdly  have  been  tho  case  if  the  Evangelists  and  Apostles 
had  understood  the  words  so  difierently. 


Christ  endttres  no  fi^esh  Pain,  329 
 *  

in  any  way  subjects  the  glorified  Lord  again  to  pain 
or  death.  We  cannot  follow  Bellarmine  in  thinking 
that  "  change  and  destruction  "  o£  the  thing  offered  is 
essential  to  a  sacrifice.  In  the  typical  sacrifices — or 
at  least  with  some  portions  o£  th^m — this  was  the 
case,  because,  without  their  being  burned  or  the  like, 
there  was  no  way  of  expressing  that  they  had  passed 
away  from  all  human  utility  and  were  irrevocably 
given  over  to  God.  But  the  destruction  was  only 
necessary  because  of  the  inherent  weakness  of  the 
type.  The  essential  feature  of  sacrifice  is  the  presenta- 
tion to  God  of  that  which  is  precious  to  us  and 
acceptable  to  Him.  If,  therefore,  we  believe  that  in 
the  Eucharist  Christ  is  offered  to  God,  there  is  no 
need  to  think  of  Him  as  still  suffering.  Although 
some  expressions  in  the  Fathers  would  literally  imply 
that  they  thought  so,  they  can  readily  be  paralleled 
by  expressions  in  authoi'S  who  certainly  did  not  think 
so.  A  S.  Chrysostom  or  a  S.  Ambrose  would  have 
been  as  much  shocked  as  we  are  to  read  in  a  modern 
schoolbook  of  dogmatic  theology  by  a  Cardinal  Arch- 
bishop, that  in  consequence  of  the  "  immolation "  in 
the  Eucharist,  "  a  change  takes  place  in  the  Victim : 
by  the  consecration,  Jesus  Christ  is  reduced  to  an 
unnatural  condition ;  and  those  sacramental  words, 
'  This  is  My  Body,'  '  This  is  My  Blood,'  pronounced 
separately,  are  like  a  sword  which  separates  mystically 
and  as  far  as  may  be  the  Body  and  the  Blood  of 
Christ."  The  whole  spirit  of  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews,  with  its  clear  and  powerful  contrast  of  the 
daily  propitiations  of  the  Law  and  the  majestic  single- 


330     He  is  offe^^ed  here  as  in  Heaven. 


ness  of  Christ's  self-sacrifice  on  the  Cross, — and  all 
right  Catholic  feeling  as  Vv^ell, — rises  in  judgment 
against  such  a  perversion,  or  rather  such  a  contradic- 
tion, of  the  Gospel.  We  have  already  shewn  that  the 
manner  of  Christ's  Real  Presence  in  the  Sacrament  of 
the  Altar  is  not  such  as  to  drag  Him  back  from  His 
state  of  glory;  nor  is  the  nature  of  the  Christian 
Sacrifice  such  as  to  involve  Him  in  any  fresh  and 
perpetual  pain.  It  could  be  no  "  Eucharist "  to  us  if 
it  were  so.  Instead  of  joyous  anthems,  our  churches 
would  be  filled  with  the  wailings,  and  sobs,  and 
smitings  upon  the  breast,  of  those  whose  sins  compelled 
them,  day  after  day,  to  save  themselves,  by  again 
summoning  the  willing  Redeemer  back,  to  undergo 
some  new  mysterious  anguish  for  them.  Many  of  us 
would  refuse  to  save  our  souls  at  the  price.  It  is  one 
thing  to  accept  with  tears  of  thankfulness  what  was 
once  effected  for  us,  without  our  knowledge,  by  His 
Sacrifice :  it  would  be  quite  another,  solemnly  and  of 
set  purpose  to  repair  to  the  altar,  to  perpetuate,  or 
renew,  any  measure  of  His  redeeming  pain. 

The  way,  then,  in  which  the  Sacrifice  must  be 
conceived  of  is  this.  Christ  is  present  with  us  at  the 
altar  in  the  same  manner  as  in  heaven.  He  allows 
us  at  the  altar  to  do  with  Him  what  He  Himself  does 
in  heaven.  Although  He  is  for  ever  seated  there,  as 
one  whose  toils  are  over,  yet  He  is  "  a  Priest  upon 
His  throne"  (Zech.  vi.  13),  and  is  perpetually  engaged 
in  presenting  on  our  behalf  the  life  which  He  once  for 
all  laid  down  and  has  taken  again,  and  never  needs 
to  lay  down  from  henceforth.    By  means  of  that 


The  Eticharist  a  Propitiation,  331 


Sacrament  which  He  puts  in  our  hands,  we  do  the 
same.  We  do  not  merely  speak  o£  the  Cross  to 
the  Father ;  we  shew  Him  the  Body  and  Blood  of  the 
living  and  present  Saviour,  who  died  upon  the  Cross, 
and  who  not  only  once  for  all  made  a  propitiation  for 
us  there,  but  who  "  is  a  propitiation  for  our  sins,  and 
not  for  ours  only  but  also  for  all  the  world (1  John 
ii.  2).  In  this  sense  we  may  even  use  language  not 
commonly  used  in  England,  and  say  that  the  Eucharist 
is  a  propitiatory  Sacrifice.  It  is  so  in  the  same  way 
as  Christ's  presentment  of  Himself  in  heaven  is.  There 
is  no  iteration  of  the  Sacrifice  of  the  Cross,  and  no 
continuation  of  it,  properly  so  called ;  but  neither 
is  there  the  bare  remembrance  of  it.  In  the  living 
Person  of  Christ,  the  eternal  Sacrifice  of  Calvary 
remains  an  ever  fresh  fact,  neither  needing  nor 
admitting  of  a  renewal.  Christ  presents  Himself  in 
heaven  for  us  in  the  inexhaustible  virtue  of  His  past 
suffering ;  and  all  the  efficacy  of  the  Eucharistic 
Sacrifice  is  derived  from  the  same. 

§  17. 

All  Christian  prayer  is  founded  upon  the  Eucha- 
ristic Communion  and  Sacrifice.  We  acquire  the 
right  to  pray  by  union  with  Christ,  and  we  exercise  it 
by  pleading  His  merits.  This  is  involved  in  saying 
"through  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord,"  when  we  pray.  It 
is  called  in  Scripture,  praying  "  in  His  name."  The 
solitary  prayers  of  the  individual  Christian  and  the 
united  prayers  of  the  Church  are  alike  in  this  respect. 
They  are  only  heard  by  virtue  of  membership  in 


332         Prayer  in  Christ's  Name. 


Christ,  and  only  so  far  as  they  are  in  true  agreement 
with  His  own  intercession.  Not  every  prayer  is  "  in 
the  name  of  Christ"  because  of  His  name  being 
mentioned  in  it,  any  more  than  "  two  or  three  "  are 
necessarily  "  gathered  together  in  His  name  "  (S.  Matt, 
xviii.  20)  because  they  call  themselves  Christians. 
There  must  be  no  admixture  of  any  other  principle,  if 
the  name  of  Christ  is  to  be  cogently  urged.  When  the 
basis  on  which  the  assembly  meets,  is  Christianity 
"plus  or  minus  some  separate  view  of  its  own — such 
as  Unitarian  or  Irvingite  Christianity,  for  example — 
then  it  does  not  meet  purely  in  the  name  of  Christ, 
and  cannot  with  confidence  count  on  the  special 
Presence  which  He  promises.  None  but  the  Catholic 
Church  of  His  own  foundation  meets  simply  in  His 
name.  That  is  why  the  validity  as  it  is  called,  of 
other  than  Catholic  communions  is  doubted.  No  one 
denies  that  Christ  can  give  Himself  to  individual  faith, 
even  amidst  a  schismatic  assembly ;  but  the  assembling 
in  a  schismatic  name  gives  no  security  that  Christ  will 
be  there,  but  rather  tlie  contrary. 

Prayer  in  Christ's  name,  whether  public  or  private, 
must  be  unreservedly  in  accordance  with  His  revealed 
character  and  purpose.  "  We  do  not  ask  in  the  name 
of  our  Master,"  says  S.  Austin,  "  what  we  ask  other- 
wise than  by  our  Master's  rules."  Such  a  caution 
puts  us  on  our  guard  in  prayer.  It  makes  us  ask 
conditionally  for  things  about  wliich  we  are  not 
clear.  At  the  same  time,  when  we  cordially  accept 
tlie  name  in  which  we  pray,  it  gives  us  perfect  assur- 
ance in  two  directions.    It  assures  us  tliat  our  j^rayer 


Prayer  not  an  Act  of  Resignation,  333 


will  not  be  literally  and  mechanically  answered,  how- 
ever fervently  we  pray,  i£  what  we  beg  would  be 
harmful  to  ourselves,  or  to  the  Church,  or  to  the 
honour  of  Christ.  And  it  assures  us  that  if  what  we 
ask  is  good,  we  shall  certainly  gain  it,  in  due  time. 
The  limitation  which  is  thus  placed  on  Christian 
prayer  by  no  means  unnerves  it,  or  reduces  it  to  a 
languid  fatalism.  On  the  contrary,  our  Lord  encour- 
ages earnestness  and  insistence.  He  Himself  used 
"  strong  crying  and  tears  "  in  the  Garden,  even  over  a 
doubtful  point ;  and  we  are  told  that  He  was  "  heard 
in  consequence  of  His  careful  reverence (Heb.  v.  7). 
The  thing  which  He  conditionally  asked  was  not  given 
Him,  but  the  prayer  was  not  fruitless.  It  procured 
something  better  instead.  Prayer  is  thus  not  merely 
the  human  will  submitting  itself  to  the  will  of  God. 
It  is  a  free  and  filial  expression  of  our  desires  to  the 
heavenly  Father,  in  the  confidence  that  His  wisdom  is 
greater  than  ours,  and  His  love  and  power  as  great 
as  His  wisdom.  So  far  from  its  being  an  act  of 
passive  resignation,  it  actually  sets  in  motion  the 
Divine  activities  in  directions  in  which,  without  it, 
God  would  not  have  worked.  As  it  is  in  temporal 
things,  so  also  in  spiritual.  God  allows  His  operation 
to  be  conditioned  by  ours.  The  riches  with  which 
God  has  stored  a  fertile  country  are  left  idle  or 
opened  out  according  to  the  energy  and  skill  of  its 
possessors.  And  so  with  the  riches  of  the  kingdom 
of  grace.  If  they  are  to  be  made  the  most  of.  Chris- 
tians, both  in  private  and  in  public,  must  pray,  and 
pray  "  in  the  Holy  Ghost "  (S.  Jude  20).    Praying  in 


334  extirpated  by  Baptism, 


the  Holy  Ghost  is  the  correlative  to  praying  in  the 
name  of  our  Lord.  It  indicates  both  the  fervour  and 
energy  with  which  we  must  pray  (Rom.  viii.  26),  and 
also  the  sanctified  purport  of  our  prayer. 

§  18. 

Baptism,  considered  as  a  washing,  sets  us  free 
from  the  guilt  o^nd  shame  of  our  original  sin ;  and, 
considered  as  a  regeneration,  it  implants  in  us  a  new 
principle  by  which  to  overcome  its  power.  Neverthe- 
less, the  "infection  of  nature,"  as  the  Article  says, 
"  doth  remain."  Baptized  men, — even  those  in  whom 
their  regeneration  has  taken  good  effect, — are  not 
exempt  from  sinful  movements  within;  and  some- 
times they  fall  into  actual  sins,  and  into  long-con- 
tinued states  of  sin.  S.  John's  teaching  does  not 
deny  this.  When  he  says,  "He  that  hath  been 
begotten  of  God  doeth  not  sin,  because  His  seed 
abideth  in  him,  and  he  is  unable  to  sin,  because  he 
hath  been  begotten  of  God"  (1  John  iii.  9),  he  is  con- 
fronting Antinomian  license.  He  denies  that  sin  is 
normally  compatible  with  the  Divine  birth,  or  can  be 
a  matter  of  indifference  to  the  regenerate.  He  teaches 
that  so  far  as  the  regenerate  man  is  true  to  his  own 
nature,  sin  is  impossible  for  him ;  and  that  in  so  far 
as  he  sins,  he  is  acting  in  opposition  to  his  real  self. 
The  sin  of  the  baptized  man  is  made  the  more  ex- 
ceeding sinful,  because  to  him  it  is,  in  the  highest 
sense,  unnatural.  When,  therefore,  the  baptized  have 
sinned,  what  provision  is  there  for  their  recovery  ? 

It  has  already  been  said  tliat  Baptism  neither  can 


Ottr  Need  of  renewed  Washing.  335 


be,  nor  needs  to  be,  repeated.  The  baptismal  union 
with  Christ,  once  given,  cleanses  the  life  which  de- 
sires to  be  cleansed,  from  end  to  end,  within  and 
without,  not  in  fragments,  but  as  a  complete  whole. 
But  it  is  difficult  for  the  mind  to  grasp  this  idea  as  it 
stands.  As  we  pass  through  life,  we  are  obliged  to 
deal  with  it  piecemeal,  as  a  matter  of  day  by  day. 
Therefore,  since  we  find  ourselves  often  involved  in 
sin,  and  our  consciences  tell  us  that  we  are  again 
guilty,  we  require  to  have  our  baptismal  washing 
made  a  ncAv  and  present  reality  to  us.  Such  a  blessing 
our  Lord  promised  us  when  He  said  that,  though  a 
man  would  not  need  to  go  down  a  second  time  into 
the  great  bath  and  wash  himself  all  over,  but  would 
know  himself  as  a  whole  to  be  clean,  ^et  he  would 
need  to  remove  the  stains  upon  his  feet  (S.  John 
xiii.  10).  He  bade  us  humbly  apply  to  one  another 
this  merciful,  if  somewhat  tedious  and  unpleasant, 
ministry :  Ye,"  He  said,  ought  also  to  wash  one 
another's  feet "  (ver.  14).  In  so  saying.  He  instituted, 
not  in  form,  but  in  substance,  what  is  sometimes 
called  the  Sacrament  of  Penance.-^  It  is  the  appli- 
cation of  no  new  element,  but  the  continued  and 
partial  application,  according  to  our  need,  of  that  by 
which  we  were  first  cleansed.    No  new  gift  is  con- 

*  It  is  usually  alleged  that  the  words  spoken  on  the  night  of  the 
Kesurrection,"  Whosesoever  sins  ye  remit,"  etc.  (S.  John  xx.  23),  were 
the  institution  of  this  Sacrament.  But  it  would  be  truer  to  say  that 
they  conveyed  the  power  of  which  this  Sacrament  is  a  special  exercise. 
The  words  include  the  Baptismal  remission  as  well  as  the  post-bap- 
tismal ;  and  in  themselves  they  contain  no  direct  command  to  absolve 
sins. 


336       Absoluti07i  trttly  Sacramental. 


ferred  on  us  by  it,  but  the  baptismal  purity  from 
guilt  is  maintained  and  renewed. 

It  is  questionable  in  what  particular  act  the  Sacra- 
ment of  Penance  lies.  Roman  theologians  incline  to 
make  it  consist  partly,  if  not  altogether,  in  the  dis- 
positions and  acts  of  the  recipient.  His  repentance, 
and  the  appropriate  expression  of  it,  enter,  in  their 
judgment,  into  the  very  essence  of  the  Sacrament. 
Such  a  doctrine  shews  a  true  and  evangelical  sense 
of  the  uselessness  of  a  formal  absolution  pronounced 
upon  an  impenitent  soul.  Nevertheless,  it  is  simpler, 
and  more  in  accordance  with  analogy,  to  consider 
these  things  as  being  rather  the  necessary  qualifica- 
tions for  receiving  the  grace,  and  to  make  the  Abso- 
lution alone  truly  sacramental.  To  unburden  the 
heart  in  confession  is  a  great  relief ;  but  the  act  of 
authoritative  pardon  is  the  point  where  the  Divine 
bounty  comes  into  play.  Confession  is  human ;  but 
Absolution  is  indeed  a  superhuman  thing.  The  priests 
to  whom,  as  officers  of  the  Church,  Jesus  Christ  has 
entrusted  the  absolving  power  (S.  John  xx.  23),  exer- 
cise it  as  no  possession  of  their  own,  but  ministerially, 
for  Him.  They  are  His  ambassadors,  offering  recon- 
ciliation on  no  terms  but  His;  but,  on  His  terms, 
confidently  offering  it.  And  what  they  offer  must 
not  1)0  coldly  reduced  to  a  remission  of  Church 
censures ;  it  is  the  blessing  of  a  free  and  bold  access 
again  to  the  living  God,  who  has  been  justly  dis- 
pleased. Nor  is  this  Absolution  a  purely  subjective 
thing.  There  is  in  it  as  in  Baptism,  a  real,  sub- 
stantive movement  of  that  cleansing  grace  which  is 


Public  and  private  Absolution.  337 


stored  in  the  Church.  Whether  it  takes  effect  or  not, 
depends  upon  the  disposition  of  the  recipient ;  but  in 
any  case  the  grace  is  there. 

There  appears  to  be  no  sufficient  reason  for  sup- 
posing, as  some'^do,  that  Absolution  is  only  sacramental 
when  pronounced  in  private  to  single  souls.  In  itself, 
so  far  as  the  movement  of  grace  is  concerned,  the 
Absolution  is  the  same,  whether  public  or  private.  If 
it  were  not  so,  there  would  be  no  particular  reason 
for  restricting  the  utterance  of  the  public  Absolutions 
to  the  priest.  The  difference  lies  in  the  method  of 
preparing  to  receive  it.  If  souls  are  able  to  grasp  it 
for  themselves  as  firmly,  it  is  as  valid  and  full  when 
uttered  in  a  general  formula  to  a  thousand  together 
as  when  uttered  to  them  one  by  one.  It  is  to  be 
feared  that  the  public  Absolutions  are  as  a  rule  more 
listlessly  given  and  received  than  the  private :  but  God 
is  good,  and  perhaps  even  a  listless  faith, — listless  at 
the  moment,  because  ill-instructed, — may  suffice  to 
appropriate  such  a  measure  of  the  grace  as  is  positively 
necessary. 

If  the  Sacrament  of  Penance  be  understood  in  the 
narrower  sense,  as  administered  in  one  of  its  forms,  in 
private,  we  can  lay  down  no  all-embracing  rule  about 
its  necessity.  All  who  would  be  saved,  must  be 
absolved ;  and  all  who  would  be  absolved,  must  con- 
fess to  the  best  of  their  ability.  But  Holy  Scripture, 
although  it  recommends  confession  to  men  as  well  as 
to  God  (S.  James  v.  16),  lays  down  no  positive  and 
universal  command  to  make  definite  confession  to 
a  priest  as  a  condition  of  Absolution.    The  experience 

z 


338      AuricMlar  Confession  left  Free. 


o£  ages  has  led  the  Church  to  provide  that  method 
in  ease  of  need  ;  but  without  clearer  instructions  from 
ancient  times,  she  has  no  right  to  prescribe  it  for  all. 
The  Holy  English  Church  vindicates  for  her  children 
the  liberty  with  which  Christ  has  set  us  free, — in  both 
directions.  If  conscience  tells  them  that  a  full  and 
explicit  confession  before  God  alone,  joined  with  the 
general  confession  in  the  public  service,  would  be  more 
beneficial  to  their  advance  in  holiness  than  private 
confession  to  a  priest,  no  man  may  compel  them  to 
a  private  confession.  If  conscience  tells  them  that 
a  private  confession  would  be  beneficial,  no  man  may 
dare  to  forbid  it  them.  Upon  the  doctrinal  question, 
indeed,  the  English  Church  leaves  no  doubt  whatever ; 
but  the  practical  question  is  left  to  be  decided  for  each 
soul  separately.  There  are  many  cases  where  private 
confession  to  the  priest  would  seem  to  do  more  harm 
than  good.  But  it  can  hardly  be  doubted  that  things 
have  gone  too  far  the  other  way  amongst  us,  and  that 
it  would  be  of  great  advantage  to  many,  especially  of 
the  male  sex,  if  confession  (in  the  technical  sense) 
were  considered  less  exceptional  than  it  is.  A  Chris- 
tian man's  sin  is  not  a  thing  between  God  and  his 
own  soul  alone,  for  we  all  "are  members  one  of 
another"  (Eph.  iv.  25).  Even  sturdy  independence 
and  masculine  self-reliance  can  be  too  dearly  pur- 
chased ; — though  the  practice  of  confession  by  no 
means  necessarily  destroys  them. 

The  use  of  Confession  need  not  involve  Direction^ 
which  is  a  wholly  different  thing. 


Unction  of  the  Sick. 


339 


§  19. 

The  Sacrament  of  Unction  of  the  Sick  is  formally 
in  abeyance  amongst  us,  but  its  place  is  taken  by  the 
solemn  Office  of  Visitation.  It  would  be  inexact  to 
ascribe  its  origin  to  the  directions  given  by  S.  James 
(ch.  V.  14).  Clearly  that  Apostle  is  recommending  a 
practice  already  in  existence.  Most  probably  it  sprang 
from  the  promise  of  our  Lord ;  "  They  shall  lay  hands 
on  the  sick,  and  they  shall  recover"  (S.  Mark  xvi.  18 ; 
comp.  S.  Mark  vi.  13).  Unction  and  Imposition  of 
Hands  are  closely  connected,  and  both  are  strengthened 
and  solemn  form^  of  blessing.  There  is  undoubtedly 
something  of  a  sacramental  nature  in  all  benedictions ; 
they  are  gracious  outgoings  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  the 
Church  towards  the  persons  Vv^ho  receive  them.  Of 
such  benedictions.  Confirmation  is  the  greatest;  and 
the  Unction  of  the  Sick,  or  Imposition  of  Hands  upon 
them,  though  certainly  no  repetition  of  Confirmation, 
partakes  of  the  same  character.  There  is  no  rea-son  to 
think  that  it  was  miraculous  in  its  intention,  except 
in  the  same  way  as  all  prayer  is;  but  its  intention 
was  primarily  the  restoration  of  bodily  health.  The 
promise  attached  to  it  was  never  unconditional : 
recovery  is  given  or  withheld  as  is  most  expedient  in 
the  eyes  of  God.  But  doubtless,  if  the  lesser  blessing 
is  withheld,  a  greater  is  given,  and  the  Holy  Ghost, 
instead  of  quickening  the  sick  body  to  earthly  life 
again,  refreshes  the  soul  to  meet  death,  and  so  works 
towards  a  better  resurrection.  It  would  be  an  undue 
pressing  of  the  letter  of  Scripture,  especially  in  view 


340 


The  Grace  of  Orders. 


of  the  uncertain  history  o£  this  rite  in  early  days,  to 
make  the  visible  act  either  of  unction  or  of  laying  on 
of  hands  essential  to  the  obtaining  of  the  inward 
grace ;  but  the  latter  symbol  can  be  used  without 
any  disloyalty  in  performing  the  existing  Office  of 
Visitation. 

§  20. 

The  means  of  grace  already  spoken  of  are  the  only 
ones  which  claim  to  be  for  all  Christians  without 
exception.  Of  the  two  which  remain,  Ordination  has 
already  been  dealt  with  in  connexion  with  the  Apostolic 
nature  of  the  Church.  It  will  only  be  necessary  here 
to  repeat  that  the  act  is  truly  sacramental.  It  is  not 
only  an  official  recognition  of  the  person  promoted  to 
ministerial  authority.  It  conveys  a  special  charisma, 
or  gift,  for  his  work.  In  the  case  of  those  who  are 
consecrated  to  supreme  rule  in  the  Church,  S.  Paul 
describes  the  charisma  as  "  a  spirit  of  power  and  love 
and  discipline  "  (2  Tim.  i.  7).  He  teaches  in  the  same 
passage  that  this  gift  does  not  work  unless  the 
recipient  diligently  cultivates  it.  But  inasmuch  as 
the  Word  and  Sacraments  belong  to  Christ  and  to  the 
Church,  and  arc  not  the  private  property  of  those  who 
administer  them,  no  unfaithfulness  or  wrong  intention 
on  the  part  of  the  duly  appointed  agent  can  vitiate 
them.  He  may  by  his  spirituality  enhance  their 
actual  effect,  or  l)y  his  apatliy  detract  from  it ;  but  he 
has  no  power  to  annul  the  essential  grace,  any  more 
than  to  create  it. 


Christian  Doctrine  of  Marriage.  341 


§  21. 

Marriage  differs  from  all  the  foregoing  in  two 
ways.  The  other  Sacraments  belong  solely  to  the 
Christian  dispensation,  and  they  concern  the  Church 
at  large.  Not  so  with  this.  It  only  concerns  the 
Church  in  so  far  as  the  Church  is  deeply  interested  in 
her  children's  private  welfare  and  the  good  of  society. 
And  marriage  is  a  primeval  institution,  a  Sacrament 
of  Nature.  The  Church  which  blesses  it  does  not 
make  it ;  in  technical  language,  the  ministers  of  the 
Sacrament  are  the  husband  and  wife.  When  a  hus- 
band and  wife  are  baptized  into  the  Church  from 
without,  no  new  ceremony  needs  to  be  performed; 
the  Church  recognises  the  tie  between  them  as  lawful 
marriage.  Of  course,  in  cases  where  a  man  has  lived 
under  the  system  of  polygamy,  the  passage  into 
Christ  cannot  carry  with  it  conjugal  relations  with 
more  than  one  wife,  for  the  words  "  they  twain are 
of  the  very  essence  of  marriage  as  known  to  the 
Church ;  but  the  one  wife  who  is  retained  is  a  true 
wife  already.  Nevertheless,  the  consecration  with 
which  Christianity  enriches  all  life  profoundly  modi- 
fies marriage.  There  is  nothing  necessarily  sinful  in 
heathen  polygamy ;  to  recognise  it  among  Christians 
would  be  to  sanction  a  regulated  adultery.  Heathen 
marriages  are  not  essentially  indissoluble  ;  Christian 
man  and  wife  can  never  be  anything  else  to  each 
other,  and  all  the  legal  divorces  in  the  world  can  only 
make  a  profane  pretence  of  putting  asunder  those 
whom  God  has  joined  together.    Christian  marriage 


342  Marriage  and  Virginity. 


is  more  than  a  binding  contract  between  two  parties 
still  in  reality  separate.  "  They  are  no  more  twain  " 
(S.  Matt.  xix.  6).  There  is,  of  course,  no  fusion  of 
personality  ;  but  there  is  a  vital  union  of  personalities 
for  which  S.  Paul  can  find  no  parallel  but  that  between 
Christ  and  the  Church.  Where  marriage  has  its  due 
course,  this  union  goes  far  beyond  what  is  earthly 
and  physical.  The  natural  element  in  it  is  made  to 
serve  as  the  basis  and  vehicle  of  Divine  grace.  By 
coming  within  the  sphere  of  the  Holy  Ghost's  opera- 
tions, marriage  conveys  the  grace  of  unselfish  devo- 
tion, of  perfected  and  purified  outpouring  of  heart  to 
heart,  of  living  in  and  for  each  other.  The  solitari- 
ness of  the  single  life  is  relieved,  and  its  deficiencies 
more  than  made  good. 

Such  being  the  Scriptural  and  Catholic  doctrine 
of  marria^ge,  the  Church  cannot  be  accused  of  Mani- 
choean  asceticism,  when  she  recognises  as  even  higher 
than  the  grace  of  marriage  the  grace  of  Christian 
virginity.  While  nothing  is  more  selfish  and  unworthy 
of  a  Christian  than  to  abstain  from  marriage  out  of 
dislike  of  responsibilities  or  out  of  cynical  indifference, 
it  is  a  noble  thing  to  feel,  and  voluntarily  embrace, 
and  suffer  patiently,  the  privations  of  the  single  life, 
in  order  to  be  more  freely  at  the  disposal  of  God  and 
man.  Our  Lord  spoke  of  it  as  a  "gift''  given  to  a 
few,  and  challenged  those  who  could,  to  take  up  with 
it  (S.  Matt.  xix.  11,  12).  And  S.  Paul,  who  at  least 
in  widowhood,  if  not  (as  is  much  more  probable)  in 
virginity,  had  received  the  gift,  commends  it  to  the 
reverent  admiration  of  tlie  Church  as  the  "better" 
thing  (1  Cor.  vii.  38). 


Chapter  X. 


®I)c  ^^vocc^^  of  ^albatiott* 

Grace  personal  in  its  Aim  and  Method — Elcciio7i  according  to  Fore- 
knowledge— Predestination  and  Htcman  Freedom — Grace  and  Free 
Will —  Vocation — Repentance  and  Faith —  Conversion— Jnstificatio7i 
by  Faith — Christian  Assurance — Sanctijication — Final  Perseve- 
rance^ 

§  1- 

The  faith  becomes  truly  a  Gospel  when  it  is  seen 
in  its  application  to  individual  souls.  If  we  were 
to  stop  at  the  point  already  reached,  we  should  only 
have  sketched  a  system,  a  philosophy,  or  a  polity. 
But  God  aims  through  these  things — through  the 
Church  and  the  Sacraments — at  reaching  individual 
souls.  He  does  not  deal  with  men  only  in  the  mass. 
Although  He  desires  to  lay  hold  upon  them  in  order 
to  weld  them  into  a  perfect  unity  in  Christ,  yet  they 
have,  singly,  a  value  of  their  own  in  His  eyes  which 
cannot  be  exaggerated.  The  Apostle  speaks  of  the 
redeeming  work  of  Christ  as  effected  for  the  whole 
and  for  the  part  in  precisely  the  same  terms.  "  Christ 
loved  the  Church,  and  gave  Himself  for  her,"  he  says ; 
but  in  another  place,  "  He  loved  me,  and  gave  Himself 
for  me "  (Eph.  v.  25 ;  Gal.  ii.  20).    It  requires  more 


344 


Grace  personal  in  its  Aim, 


imagination,  as  well  as  more  unselfishness,  than  the 
run  of  men  possess,  to  feel  from  the  outset  great  joy 
in  promises  to  the  world,  the  race,  the  Church.  The 
thing  which  touches  hearts  is  to  discover  God  s  interest 
in  their  personal  needs  and  trials.  This,  then,  is  what 
makes  the  Church  so  evangelical.  She  seeks  men  one 
by  one,  not  for  her  ov^n  good,  but  for  theirs.  The 
love  of  souls,  the  longing  to  bring  home  to  them  what 
God  feels  with  regard  to  them  and  what  He  has  done 
to  prove  it,  is  as  true  a  "  note  "  of  the  Church  as  any 
of  the  four  which  have  been  described.  It  is  little 
comfort, — it  is  positive  pain, — to  know  what  blessings 
are  stored  for  men  in  the  Church,  until  they  have 
been  brought  to  realise  it  for  themselves  and  to  rejoice 
in  a  conscious  experience  of  those  blessings. 

It  is,  then,  one  of  the  main  wonders  of  the  Gospel, 
that  God  has  not  only  made  a  bountiful  provision  for 
men's  needs  in  Christ,  but  that  He  also  prepares  and 
leads  men  to  seek,  and  to  find,  and  to  make  good  use 
of  the  provision.  God  s  grace  is  not  simply  embodied 
in  an  objective  form,  and  despatched  into  the  world, 
for  any  one  to  help  himself  to  it  who  likes.  It  both 
singles  out  the  persons  to  whom  it  comes ;  and  it 
occupies  itself  with  their  inward  and  most  subjective 
moods  and  inclinations,  aiding  them  to  receive  what 
it  brings.  In  fact  we  arc  accustomed  almost  to 
restrict  the  name  of  Grace  to  its  internal  operation 
upon  souls.  That  beautiful  word  denotes  in  the  first 
instance  simply  a  favour  ;  and  it  may  rightly  describe 
God's  new  line  of  conduct  towards  humanity  at  large 
in  the  Incarnation.    Nevertheless,  its  characteristic 


Summary  of  the  Life  of  Grace, 


345 


action  is  to  be  seen  to  greatest  advantage  in  relation  to 
men  one  by  one.  However  widely  diffused,  the  favour 
of  God  is  never  promiscuous  and  undiscriminating ; 
and  although  it  moves  on  principle,  without  caprice, — 
or  it  could  not  be  Divine, — yet  it  accommodates  and 
adapts  itself  most  tenderly  to  the  personal  objects  of 
its  choice.  The  whole  history  of  Christian  souls  is 
the  history  of  the  dealings  of  grace  with  them.  There 
is  an  endless  diversity  in  the  details  of  operation,  and 
a  guide  of  souls  has  to  beware  of  substituting  a  coarse 
and  rough  uniformity  of  experience  for  the  delicacy 
and  flexibility  of  grace.  Souls  are  not  turned  out 
like  manufactured  articles.  Yet  the  main  course  of 
the  history  is  the  same  for  all.  S.  Paul  gathers  it  up 
in  a  famous  summary : — "  Whom  He  foreknew,  He  also 
predestinated  to  be  conformed  to  the  image  of  His  Son, 
that  He  might  be  a  firstborn  among  many  brethren. 
Moreover  whom  He  did  predestinate,  them  He  also 
called ;  and  whom  He  called,  them  He  also  justified ; 
and  whom  He  justified,  them  He  also  glorified" 
(Rom.  viii.  29,  30). 

§2. 

This  summary  shows  us  how  far  back  the  work  of 
grace  begins.  It  does  not  begin  when  the  man  first 
becomes  conscious  of  it,  nor  even  at  his  appearance 
on  the  stage  of  life.  No  Christian  emerges  unforeseen 
in  the  stream  of  time,  to  attract  on  emerging  the 
favourable  attention  of  God.  Before  the  stream  began 
to  flow, — before  ever  God  set  in  motion  the  forces 
which  ultimately  issued  in  producing  the  man,  the 


346         Foreknowledge  and  Election. 


man  was  "foreknown."  It  is  not  said  that  all  the 
man's  actions  were  foreknown, — though  that  would 
be  true  enough, — but  the  man  himself.  In  the  eternal 
play  of  possible  creations  before  the  mind  of  God  in 
Christ,  this  character  appeared, — this  combination  of 
gifts,  capable  of  subserving  just  this  sacred  purpose,  of 
exemplifying  this  special  form  of  truth,  of  answering 
to  this  particular  aspect  of  love.  God  Imew  that 
character,  and  was  pleased  with  it,  and  determined  to 
give  it  a  real  existence,  and  to  subject  it  to  the  actual 
discipline  of  life;  and  He  so  ordered  things,  that  in 
due  time  we  should  be  born,  and  should  be  born 
again ;  and  should  be  set  to  those  "  good  works  which 
God  before  prepared  that  we  should  vf alk  in  them " 
(Eph.  ii.  10). 

Foreknowledge,  by  itself,  might  be  predicated  of 
every  human  being;  for  all  souls  are  the  creation 
of  God,  who  cannot  be  thought  of  as  acting  on  the 
spur  of  the  moment.  But  the  foreknowledge  which 
issues  in  Predestination  is  not  the  lot  of  all.  It  only 
holds  true  of  a  certain  number.  Such  foreknowledge 
is  the  foreknowledge  of  approval  for  a  particular 
purpose,  and  it  causes  God  to  make  a  distinction 
between  those  souls  and  others.  They  are,  in  S. 
Paul's  language,  "  an  election  of  grace  "  (Rom.  xi.  5). 
It  is  manifest,  upon  the  face  of  things,  that  the  grace 
of  God  picks  and  chooses  among  men.  Though  all 
souls  are  dear  to  Him,  and  He  "  wills  all  men  to  be 
saved  and  to  come  to  the  knowledge  of  the  truth" 
(1  Tim.  ii.  4),  yet  He  docs  not  deal  with  all  alike. 
As  it  is  with  regard  to  natural  gifts — wealth,  beauty, 


Privileges  of  the  Elect.  347 


intellect,  and  the  like, — so  it  is  in  spiritual  things. 
There  is  great  inequality.  The  elect  are  on  a  different 
footinof  from  the  rest  of  men.  To  them  has  been 
given,  by  the  predestination  of  God,  what  is  not  the 
common  property  of  mankind.  Whether  the  numbers 
who  share  the  privilege  with  them  be  large  or  small, 
makes  no  difference  to  the  reality  of  their  election. 
In  some  countries  and  ages, — our  own  for  example, — 
the  elect  may  form  an  immense  majority  of  *the 
population ;  but  nevertheless,  each  single  soul  is  as 
much  the  object  of  a  deliberate  choice  of  God,  dating 
from  all  eternity,  as  if  it  were  one  of  a  little  handful 
in  the  Ephesus  or  Eome  of  S.  Paul's  time. 

Of  course,  the  difference  is  not  that  which  Antino- 
mianism  has  imagined, — that  the  elect  may  do  with 
impunity  what  is  regarded  as  sin  in  others,  for  God 
''hath  not  given  any  m_an  licence  to  sin"  (Ecclus. 
XV.  20).  Nor  is  the  way  of  holiness  made  easier  for 
them ;  on  the  contrary,  it  is  often  far  harder.  The 
difference  is  wholly  one  of  spiritual  privilege.  And 
that  privilege  is  a  present  privilege,  not  a  future  one. 
According  to  the  general  usage  of  the  New  Testament, 
all  who  are  admitted  into  the  Church  on  ea^rth  are  the 
elect.  The  term  (except  in  a  few  passages  of  the 
Gospels,  where  the  context  makes  its  meaning  clear) 
does  not  express  those  who  are  finally  selected  to  par- 
take of  the  joys  of  heaven.  Before  that  blessing  can 
be  theirs,  they  must,  with  faithful  endeavour,  "  make 
their  calling  and  election  sure"  (2  Pet.  i.  10).  The 
thing  to  which  they  have  been  elected,  "  according  to 
the  foreknowledge  of  God,"  is  described  by  S.  Peter  as 


348     The  Few  chosen  on  behalf  of  All. 

"obedience  and  sprinkling  of  the  Blood  of  Jesus 
Christ (1  Pet.  i.  2) :  that  is  to  say,  they  are 
Christians.  This  is  already  theirs;  and  if  it  be 
rightly  used,  it  is  a  pledge  and  an  earnest  of  eternal 
salvation. 

If  it  seems  at  all  unfair  that  God  should  thus 
make  distinctions  among  His  human  creatures,  which 
are  not  based  upon  their  proven  personal  merits,  nor 
even  upon  His  prevision  of  their  merits,  but  upon  His 
own  absolute  sovereign  pleasure,  we  must  remember 
first  that  we  do  not  yet  see  all  the  issues  of  this  mode 
of  action,  and  that  in  the  end  it  may  be  found  to 
be  the  best  way  of  benefiting  mankind  at  large,  to 
approach  them  through  a  concentrated  and  united 
body  of  highly  privileged  souls,  whose  object  it  is  not 
to  exclude  others  from  their  privilege,  but  to  extend  it 
to  as  many  as  they  can  reach.  The  elect  people  of 
God,  in  this  dispensation  as  well  as  in  that  which 
preceded  it,  are  not  elected  only  for  their  own  advan- 
tage, but  for  the  advantage  of  all.  "  Ye  are  a  chosen 
race,''  says  S.  Peter,  "  in  order  that  ye  may  carry 
abroad  the  tidings  of  His  excellencies  who  called  you 
out  of  darkness  into  His  marvellous  light "  (1  Pet. 
ii.  9).  If  the  salvation  of  the  world  was  to  be  effected 
in  a  historical  manner  at  all,  perhaps  no  other 
method  was  possible.  But  however  this  may  be,  at 
least  tlic  harshness  of  the  doctrine  of  election  is 
softened,  wlien  we  see  that  the  true  antithesis  to 
election  is  not  rejection  or  reprobation,  but  passing 
by,  and  that,  perliaps,  only  for  a  time.  Mankind  are 
not  divided  into  two  classes, — the  few  etci^nally  set 


Predestination  and  Freedom.  349 


apart  for  salvation, — the  mass  for  damnation.  The 
privilege  of  the  few,  though  real  and  positive  now,  is 
theirs  on  probation  ;  and  others  are  to  gain  it  through 
them. 

§3. 

Attempts  have  been  made,  but  without  much  suc- 
cess, to  draw  a  broad  line  of  distinction  between 
Election  and  Predestination.  Those  attempts  have 
been  prompted  by  the  desire  to  reconcile  God's 
eternal  purpose  with  human  freedom.  Perhaps  it 
is  impossible  for  our  present  intellectual  powers 
clearly  to  state  how  the  two  things  are  compatible. 
It  is  but  one  instance  of  the  difficulty  of  co-ordinating 
the  finite  and  the  infinite.  At  present  v*^e  do  not  see, 
in  the  first  place,  how  time  and  eternity  meet. 
Eternity  is  commonly  thought  of  as  if  it  were  a  state 
or  series  anterior  to  time,  and  to  be  resumed  again 
when  time  comes  to  an  end.  This,  however,  only 
reduces  eternity  to  time  again,  and  puts  the  life  of 
God  in  the  same  line  as  our  own,  only  coming  from 
further  back.  And  our  conceptions  of  the  almighti- 
ness  of  God  are  coarse.  It  seems  as  if  an  almighty 
being  could  never  be  crossed  or  hindered.  Having 
everything  in  His  own  hands,  and  perfectly  knowing 
His  own  mind,  God  must,  so  men  argue,  always  have 
His  own  way  in  every  detail.  But  they  forget  that 
God  is  not  an  abstract  almightiness,  but  almighty 
Holiness  and  Love  ;  and  that  for  the  sake  of  holiness 
and  love  He  may  be  willing  to  submit  to  things 
which  He  would  rather  have  had  otherwise,  confident 


350 


Our  Freedom  certain. 


that  His  holiness  and  love  will  eventually  come  forth 
victorious  even  where  He  seems  to  have  been  most 
crossed. 

This  at  any  rate  is  certain,  that  where  two  truths 
seem  to  us  incompatible,  one  o£  which  is  beyond  our 
experience,  and  the  other  within  it,  we  have  no  right 
to  magnify  the  more  distant  truth  at  the  expense  of 
the  nearer.  And  as  we  are  conscious  of  freedom, — 
within  limits  which  we  shall  proceed  to  discuss, — we 
are  bound  not  to  interpret  God's  Predestination  in 
such  a  manner  as  to  annihilate  our  freedom.  God's 
elect  are  not  machines,  which  fulfil  of  necessity  and 
with  exactness  a  fore-ordained  programme.  Their 
liberty  is  not  a  semblance  a^nd  fiction.  They  are  not 
like  chessmen  on  a  board  who  should  attribute  to 
themselves  the  actions  of  the  mind  and  hand  that 
moves  them.  When  Holy  Scripture  appeals  to 
motives  of  conduct,  it  recognises  in  us  a  power  to 
give  heed  to  such  motives,  or  to  ignore  them.  Com- 
mandments and  promises,  warnings  and  threats,  all 
shew  that  God  Himself  regards  us  as  voluntary  and 
responsible  agents.  If  the  lives  of  the  predestinate 
were  only  the  execution  of  what  was  perfectly  settled 
and  mapped  out  eternally,  God's  anger  at  their  falls, 
o.nd  God's  joy  over  their  penitence,  would  become  for 
us  unmeaning. 

"  It  seems  plain,  therefore,  that  we  must  regard 
God's  Predestination  as  contingent,  not  absolute,  so 
far  as  concerns  our  ultimate  destiny.  As  we  have 
shewn,  the  Scripture  teaching  about  election,  being 
for  practical  and  not  for  theoretical  purposes,  is  con- 


Comfort  of  the  Doctrine.  351 


cerned  with  our  present  position,  rather  than  the 
future.  It  rests  with  us  whether  the  life  of  grace 
shall  pass  into  the  life  of  glory.  So  far  as  we  can  see, 
the  Divine  Predestination  is  capable  of  being  defeated. 
But  such  a  thought,  though  full  of  solemnity  and  fear, 
does  not  rob  the  doctrine  of  Predestination  of  all 
strength  and  comfort.  On  the  contrary.  If  w^e  could 
suppose  the  Divine  Predestination  to  be  absolute,  then 
we  might  live  in  a  fever  of  uncertainty  whether  we 
were  among  the  predestinate  or  not.  Few,  especially 
at  the  outset  of  their  Christian  career,  would  dare  to 
assume  it  of  themselves;  and  in  many  instances  it 
would  do  more  harm  than  good  to  do  so.  But  when 
we  follov/  the  teaching  of  S.  Peter  and  S.  Paul,  and 
recognise  that  all  the  baptized  are  elect  and  pre- 
destinate, then,  although  the  final  result  is  not  yet 
assured  to  us,  we  receive  unspeakable  comfort  and 
hope.  The  weakest  Christian  may  believe  that  he 
is  no  intruder  w^ithin  the  sacred  precinct,  brought  in 
by  his  own  presumption  or  the  mistaken  kindness  of 
friends.  He  is  where  God  Himself  has  placed  him, 
and  had  eternally  determined  to  place  him.  His  very 
weaknesses  may  be  a  reason  why  he  was  thus  elected, 
to  shew  strikingly  the  power  of  Divine  grace.  And  if 
the  discerning  choice  of  God  has  so  favoured  him  as 
to  translate  him  into  the  kingdom  of  His  dear  Son, 
then  God  will  not  easily  give  him  up  or  cast  him  out 
again.  The  Christian  sees,  represented  in  the  con- 
crete fact  of  liis  Baptism,  the  eternal  and  unchangeable 
attitude  of  God  towards  him.  His  own  personality, 
now  passing  through  the  vicissitudes  of  an  earthly  dis- 


352     Original  Freedom  of  Mans  Will. 


cipline,  is  linked  to  the  stability  o£  the  life  of  God. 
That  God  should  change  His  mind  towards  His 
servant  is  inconceivable,  unless  the  servant  should 
altogether  throw  oft*  his  allegiance  to  God.  God  has 
set  His  heart  upon  him,  and  will  not  easily  let  him  go. 
By  gentle  means,  or  by  stern.  He  will  use  every  art  to 
retain  him.  And  thus  the  man  who  would  soon  despair 
if  he  thought  only  of  his  own  weak  will,  is  encouraged, 
without  being  made  presumptuous,  by  remembering 
that  there  is  another,  stronger  Will,  no  less  deeply 
interested  in  his  salvation  than  he  is  himself. 

§  4. 

The  Grace  which  foreknows  and  elects  us  in 
eternity,  actively  busies  itself  with  us  when,  in  due 
time,  we  come  into  life.  It  would  go  ill  with  us  other- 
wise. It  has  been  shewn  in  an  earlier  chapter  that 
the  will  of  man  is  not  wholly  free.  Even  according  to 
the  Creator's  intention  it  was  never  free  in  the  sense 
of  being  unlimited  and  unconditioned.  Adam  had 
freedom  of  will  in  Paradise,  but  his  freedom  had  only 
the  range  belonging  to  man,  and  to  a  man  in  his  cir- 
cumstances. Within  that  range,  however,  it  was  truly 
free, — by  which  we  mean  that  there  was  no  unnatural 
check  upon  its  action,  cither  from  within  or  from 
without.  For  without,  everything  had  been  designed 
for  the  very  purpose  of  eliciting  all  his  powers  healthily 
and  happily  ;  and  witliin,  there  was  no  disorder  to 
liinder  him  from  complete  correspondence  with  his 
environment.  But  wlien  lie  abused  liis  powers,  he 
vitiated  his  own  constitution^  and  his  relation  to  all 


Mans  Will  no  longer  free. 


353 


that  surrounded  him.  He  came  to  be  unnaturally 
under  the  power  of  the  things  that  were  intended  to 
have  ministered  to  his  advancement,  and  he  found 
himself  destitute  of  the  force  by  which  to  recover  his 
former  footing.  The  heirs  of  his  fallen  nature  are 
still  indeed  free,  in  a  sense.  When  they  act,  that  is, 
they  are  conscious  of  never  being  violently  forced  to 
act,  against  their  wills,  they  themselves  repudiating 
the  action  continuously  and  to  the  last.  Strong 
pressure  may  be  brought  to  bear  upon  them,  which 
they  feel  unable  to  resist ;  but  in  the  end,  even  if 
they  would  have  preferred  to  act  otherwise,  they  act 
voluntarily.  They  yield,  though  it  may  be  reluctantly, 
to  the  pressure.  In  this  sense  they  are  free  agents. 
But  this  does  not  constitute  true  freedom.  Fallen  men 
have  only  the  freedom  of  a  diseased,  not  of  a  healthy 
subject.  What  would  be  repulsive  to  the  human  soul 
in  its  right  state,  has  a  morbid  fascination  for  them 
which  they  cannot  resist.  They  act  according  to  their 
nature  when  they  voluntarily  choose  it ;  for  the  un- 
natural has  become  to  them  the  natural.  A  pressure 
of  temptation,  which  Adam  in  Paradise  would  have 
instantly  repelled,  by  the  wholesome  instinct  of  his 
uncorrupted  constitution,  in  concert  with  ever  present 
grace,  overwhelms  at  once  his  descendant,  as  unwilling 
as  he  is  unable  to  stem  the  flood. 

I  The  Pelagian  teaching,  which  it  was  the  great 
work  of  S.  Austin  to  confound,  started  with  an 
excellent  intention.  It  claimed  to  enter,  in  the  name 
of  masculine  and  common-sense  morality,  a  protest 
against   a  system  which  appeared   to  discourage 

2  A 


354        Platisibleness  of  Pelagianism. 


strenuous  effort,  and  make  men  only  passive  in  the 
work  o£  sanetification.  It  did  not  indeed  assert  that 
men  might  be  righteous,  i£  they  chose,  without  the 
grace  o£  God ;  but  it  explained  grace  in  such  a  way 
as  to  confuse  it  with  natural  endowments.  Grace, 
to  the  Pelagian,  consisted  in  such  gifts  as  conscience 
and  free  will  within  the  man,  and  the  revelation 
of  God's  character  and  law  without.  Eefusing  to 
recognise  the  congenital  depravity  which  results  from 
the  Fall,  this  school  of  moralists  called  upon  men  to 
be  up  and  doing,  instead  of  petitioning  God  for  more 
grace  to  do  what  He  had  already  put  well  within  their 
power.  In  this  first  rough  form  Pelagianism  was  not 
difficult  to  expose ;  but  it  vf as  more  difficult  to  expose 
the  Semipelagianism,  as  it  is  called,  which  succeeded  it, 
and  which  in  various  forms  continues  in  the  Church 
to  this  day.  The  Semipelagian  turn  of  thought 
recognises,  though  it  minimises,  the  disorder  of  our 
human  nature.  It  also  accepts  a  true  definition  of 
grace.  But  it  clings  to  the  notion  that  there  is  at 
any  rate  so  much  good  left  in  man  as  to  enable  him 
to  meet  God  part  way.  He  cannot,  so  it  is  said, 
succeed  in  his  efforts  after  righteousness  without 
Divine  aid,  but  he  can  desire  to  succeed,  and  do  his 
best,  and  God  will  reward  his  endeavours  by  a  gift  of 
grace.  He  can  put  himself  in  the  way  to  obtain 
grace,  and  so  practise  himself  in  the  lower  degrees 
of  goodness  that  he  may  (in  tlic  quaint  phrase  con- 
demned by  the  Anglican  Articles)  deserve  grace  of 
congruity. 

Catholic  teaching,  on  the  other  hand,  in  accord- 


Our  entire  Dependence  on  Grace.  355 


ance  with  Scripture  and  with  deep  observation,  insists 
upon  ascribing  to  God's  grace  the  very  earliest  germ 
of  a  movement  in  the  will  towards  what  is  good.  The 
Church  does  not,  it  is  true,  agree  with  Calvinism  in 
its  extravagant  estimate  of  the  corruption  of  our 
nature.  It  acknowledges  that,  in  spite  of  internal 
discord  and  of  a  distinct  bent  towards  selfishness  in 
some  form  or  other,  there  yet  remain  in  man  the 
elements  of  a  noble  being,  if  only  they  can  be  rightly 
set  to  work.  But  without  a  quickening  touch  the 
noble  elements  have  no  chance  of  going  rightly  to 
work.  The  will  of  man,  at  best,  cannot  choose  in 
entire  independence  of  its  surroundings,  or  fall  in  love 
with  visions  which  are  not  suggested  by  the  things 
it  actually  sees.  If,  therefore,  it  is  to  desire  good- 
ness, goodness  must  be  presented  to  it ;  and,  in  the 
present  state  of  man  and  his  world,  goodness  must 
be  presented  with  sufficient  vigour  and  pertinacity 
to  neutralise,  at  least,  the  dead  set  which  is  being 
made  upon  the  soul  from  the  other  side,  and  give  it 
a  fair  field.  Grace  must  bring  a  counter-pressure 
to  bear  upon  the  will,  to  save  it  from  being  swept 
away  by  temptation,  and  enable  it  even  to  wish  for 
what  is  good.  The  Semipelagian  theory  is  so  far 
true,  that  each  gift  of  grace  properly  utilised  becomes 
a  foundation  for  fresh  gifts.  God  gives  "grace  in 
answer  to  grace  "  (S.  John  i.  16).  But  they  are  His 
own  gifts  which  He  thus  rewards  in  us.  Trace  the 
series  back  to  the  very  earliest,  and  the  very  earliest 
is  as  much  His  as  the  latest.  Man  has  absolutely 
nothing  by  which  to  purchase  or  attract  even  the  first 


356         Impossibility  of  meriting  it. 


rudiments  o£  grace.  It  would  be  quite  contrary  to 
the  fundamental  notion  o£  grace  to  think  so.  There 
is  nothing  so  opposed  to  it  as  the  thought  o£  debt  or 
o£  merit.  I£  by  grace/'  says  Paul,  "  then  no  longer 
as  a  result  o£  works,  otherwise  grace  is  no  more 
grace (Rom.  xi.  6).  It  is  o£  the  very  essence  of 
grace  that  it  should  be  a  movement  of  pure  generosity 
on  the  part  of  God,  unmixed  with  any  sense  of  obli- 
gation or  necessity.  Thus  the  grace  of  God  is  as 
much  needed  to  enable  us  to  desire  to  do  what  is 
right,  as  to  do  it  when  we  desire  it.  It  is  a  true,  and 
not  a  false  humility, — the  payment  of  a  just  tribute, 
not  a  hypocritical  adulation, — when  the  soul,  on  doing 
well,  refuses  to  take  any  credit  to  itself  whatever,  and 
passes  on  the  glory  with  sincere  gratitude  to  God, 
saying,  Thou,  Lord,  hast  wrought  all  our  works  in 
us "  (Isa.  xxvi.  12),  and  again,  "  It  is  God  which 
worketh  in  us,  both  to  will,  and  to  work,  in  fulfilment 
of  His  gracious  purpose"  (Phil.  ii.  13).  It  is  His 
/'preventing  (i.e.  antecedent)  grace"  which  inspires 
the  holy  wish ;  it  is  "  accompanying,  or  co-operating 
grace  "  which  brings  the  holy  Avish  to  a  good  effect. 
Thus  from  first  to  last  the  performance  of  every  right 
action,  and  the  building  up  of  every  good  character, 
is  God's  work. 

Yet  grace  never  supersedes  the  man's  self-deter- 
-mination.  It  would  be  totally  at  variance  with  its 
purpose,  were  it  to  compel  men  to  act  in  a  certain 
way,  independent  of  their  own  choice.  For  it  is  not 
God's  object  merely  to  get  riglit  tilings  done,  but 
to  get  lioly  characters   estal)lished ;   and  the  only 


Grace  not  irresistible. 


357 


notion  we  can  form  of  a  holy  character  is  that  of  a 
being  who  always  freely  chooses  holiness.  Forced 
sanctity  would  be  but  a  poor  make-believe.  Grace 
may,  it  is  true,  sometimes  go  beyond  the  bare  restora- 
tion of  a  moral  equilibrium.  It  may  make  it,  as  in 
the  case  of  Saul  of  Tarsus,  "  hard  for  a  man  to  kick 
against  the  pricks  "  (Acts  xxvi.  14).  Sovereign  grace 
can  be  very  masterful ;  in  its  benevolent  determina- 
tion it  often  appears  almost  overbearing.  But  there 
are  lengths  to  which  it  cannot  go.  In  the  very 
nature  of  things  it  dares  not  be  irresistible.  The  man 
himself,  in  the  last  resort,  and  on  each  occasion, 
must  decide  on  which  set  of  forces  he  will  throw 
himself,  those  that  make  for  good,  or  those  that 
make  for  evil. 

§  5. 

The  first  motions  of  preventing  Grace  are  indis- 
tinguishable from  those  of  Providence.  They  take 
place  in  that  kingdom  of  nature  which  needs  pre- 
paring before  it  can  receive  the  characteristic  work 
of  grace.  To  this  fact  our  Lord  has  been  thought  to 
point  when  He  says,  "  No  man  can  come  to  Me,  except 
the  Father  which  sent  Me  draw  him"  (S.  John  vi.  44), 
— where,  however,  we  must  be  careful  to  understand 
that  our  Lord  is  not  repelling  and  discouraging  effort, 
but  rather  assuring  His  hearers  that  if  they  feel  them- 
selves desirous  of  coming  to  Him,  it  is  a  proof  already 
of  the  Father's  interest  in  their  salvation.  The 
Father  thus  draws  men  naturally  towards  Christ  by 
causing  them  to  be  born  of  Christian  parents,  by 


358  The  Calling  of  God. 


temperament,  by  education  and  discipline,  by  sorrows 
and  losses,  or  joys  and  affections,  which  make  their 
hearts  susceptible,  even  by  permitting  falls  into  sin 
which  create  a  sense  o£  bondage  and  a  desire  for 
liberty.  Then,  when  the  soul  is  ripe  for  it,  God 
utters  His  Call  to  it.  The  eternal  Election  expresses 
itself  in  time  as  an  actual  Vocation.  At  what  moment 
in  the  history  of  the  soul  the  vocation  shall  be  issued, 
God  alone  can  tell.  The  man's  own  behaviour  may 
hasten  or  delay  it,  though  (as  we  have  said)  he  can 
do  nothing  to  cause  it.  And  after  being  called  he 
may  long  be  unaware  of  it,  or  neglect  it,  or  fight 
against  it.  In  the  normal  state  of  things,  in  a 
Christian  nation,  the  call  of  God  comes  to  us  in 
infancy,  before  we  have  power  to  discern  its  meaning. 
To  many  the  sense  of  the  call  is  mixed  with  the 
earliest  recollections,  and  has  quietly  increased  with 
advancing  years.  Many  who  received  it  in  infancy, 
only  become  conscious  of  it  in  later  life,  and  suppose 
that  it  never  came  to  them  before.  There  are  some 
to  whom  it  remains  through  life  an  unknown  thing. 
Some,  it  may  be,  hear  it  for  the  first  time  in  the 
moment  of  dying.  Men  to  whom  it  does  not  come  in 
vain  may  reply  to  its  summons  with  very  varying 
degrees  of  alacrity ;  but,  although  the  firstfruits  of 
grace  may  be  given  before  the  call  is  clearly  heard, 
the  soul  cannot  be  said  to  be  living  the  life  of  grace 
until  it  begins  to  respond  to  its  vocation. 


Repentance  and  Faith. 


359 


§6. 

To  create  in  the  soul  a  sense  of  need,  and  to 
direct  it  to  the  source  of  supply,  is  the  first  marked 
action  of  grace.  These  two  things  are  the  beginnings 
of  Repentance  and  Faith. 

Repentance  is  not  merely  a  change  of  conduct, 
but  a  change  of  conduct  based  upon  a  change  of 
feeling  and  mind.  It  is  a  repudiation  of  what  is  now 
felt  to  be  sinful.  It  is  not  enough  to  leave  off  from 
doing  wrong  and  begin  to  do  right ;  there  must  be 
a  sense  of  guilt,  joined  with  sorrow  for  having  done 
v/rong  in  the  past,  and  for  being  still  tainted  by 
inward  evil.  And  in  order  that  the  repentance  may 
be  good,  the  motive  for  sorrow  must  be  found  not 
solely  in  the  sinner  s  hopes  or  fears  for  himself,  nor 
even  in  the  thought  of  the  injury  he  has  inflicted  upon 
his  fellow-men ;  but  in  the  knowledge  that  he  has 
grieved  and  offended  God.  The  determination  to 
make  what  amends  may  be  possible  (called  in  techni- 
cal language,  satisfaction),  and  the  readiness  to 
acknowledge  to  God  and  (where  advisable)  to  man 
the  whole  extent  of  the  v^^rong  done  (or  confession), 
must  be  the  outcome  of  a  loving  and  unselfish  grief, 
which  bears  the  name  of  contrition.  These — contri- 
tion, confession,  amendment, — are  the  three  parts  of 
repentance. 

Faith,  in  like  manner,  is  not  the  acquiescence  of 
the  intellect  in  a  true  proposition  or  propositions. 
To  assent,  for  instance,  to  the  fact  that  Christ  died 
for  us  is  insufficient.     Saving  faith  is  the  reliance 


360     Degrees  of  Repentance  and  Faith. 


of  the  soul  upon  a  living  Being.  Convinced  by  such 
facts  as  it  has  already  apprehended,  the  soul  is  assured 
that  the  unknown  is  in  keeping  with  the  known, 
and  that  it  may  safely  trust  its  God.  Nor  is  the 
trust  a  passive  one  only.  It  cannot  help  influencing 
action.  As  repentance  springs  from  the  heart  and 
expresses  itself  in  language  and  in  conduct,  so  does 
faith.  That  is  not  faith  which  does  not  prompt  men 
to  make  confession  with  the  mouth  unto  salvation  " 
(Rom.  X.  10),  and  "  thoughtfully  to  take  the  lead  in 
excellent  works "  (Titus  iii.  8).  Faith  may  be  de- 
scribed as  an  active  and  outspoken  reliance  upon 
God. 

There  is  no  necessary  order  of  precedence  between 
Faith  and  Eepentance.  Sometimes  the  one  makes  its 
conscious  appearance  first,  and  sometimes  the  other. 
They  continue  to  work  side  by  side  throughout  life. 
Repentance  is  perpetually  deepened  by  the  advance 
of  faith, — and  faith  strengthened  in  proportion  to  the 
increasing  purity  of  repentance.  Neither  term  repre- 
sents a  fixed  amount.  There  is  an  endless  variety 
of  degrees  of  repentance  and  faith.  No  quantitative 
limit  is  named  in  Scripture,  as  a  minimum  below 
which  the  soul  cannot  be  saved.  The  thing  required 
is  that  repentance  and  faith  should  be  honest  and 
sincere  so  far  as  they  go.  If  that  be  the  case,  then, 
however  small  may  be  the  present  amount,  it  contains 
the  whole  future  development.  When  our  Lord  says 
to  His  disciples,  "  If  ye  have  faith  as  a  grain  of 
mustard  seed,  nothing  shall  be  impossible  unto  you  " 
(S.  Matt.  xvii.  20),  He  docs  not  mean  that  the  very 


The  Essence  of  Co7ive7's{on.  361 


smallest  measure  o£  faith  will  then  and  there  be  able 
to  work  miracles,  but  that  it  will  go  on  till  it  becomes 
able  to  work  them,  because  a  true  faith  necessarily 
expands.  We  are  not  in  a  position,  therefore,  to  say 
whether  saving  faith  must,  at  si^ny  particular  moment, 
be  what  is  called  jides  formata, — that  is,  a  faith 
fertilised  by  love, — or  not.  In  any  given  case,  the 
answer  to  that  question  must  depend  on  the  oppor- 
tunities which  the  soul  has  had, 

§  7. 

When  repentance  and  faith  reach  a  point  where 
they  become  conscious,  free,  and  energetic,  the  crisis 
is  known  as  Conversion.  Conversion  is  not  quite  the 
same  as  an  awakening  to  spiritual  facts ;  for  there  is 
sometimes,  as  in  the  case  of  Judas,  a  real  awakening 
without  conversion,  and,  on  the  other  hand,  a  true 
conversion  often  takes  place  without  much  awakening. 
The  essence  of  conversion  is  a  true  movement  of  the 
will,  turning  solidly  from  self  and  the  world  to  God- 
If  it  is  true  that  all  men  are  born  with  a  bent  towards 
sin,  and  have  their  faces  set  in  a  wrong  direction,  then 
at  some  point  of  their  lives  or  another,  and  in  some 
mode  or  another,  there  must  come  a  voluntary  change. 
But  it  is  a  fatal  mistake  to  suppose  that  conversion 
must  be  exactly  alike  in  all,  and  to  take  as  the  normal 
type  of  it  that  which  comes  when  a  man  has  grown 
up  to  years  of  discretion  in  carelessness  and  sin.  It 
wears  different  aspects  in  different  men,  according  to 
their  temperament,  and  according  to  their  circum- 
stances.   It  may  take  place  in  infancy,  or  it  may  take 


362     Conversions,  some  sndden,  some  not. 


place  on  the  death-bed.  With  some  the  crisis  comes 
unperceived,  like  the  moment  when  the  sun  begins  to 
appear  above  the  horizon.  With  others  it  comes 
through  agonizing  struggles  and  on  a  sudden.  But 
in  the  most  sudden  cases,  there  has  been  a  secret 
preparation ;  and  in  the  most  quiet,  there  is  a  definite 
point  at  which  the  turning  begins  to  be  truly  volun- 
tary. God  has  need  o£  all  kinds  of  experience  in  His 
kingdom  o£  grace,  and  we  cannot  assign  a  higher 
value  to  the  one  form  of  conversion  or  to  the  other. 
Only  we  see  that,  as  a  rule,  the  temperaments  which 
are  the  most  vividly  and  violently  awakened  to 
spiritual  facts, — such  facts  as  guilt,  and  pardon,  judg- 
ment to  come,  and  the  meaning  of  the  Cross, — are 
those  which  are  the  most  effective  agents  in  the 
evangelization  of  the  world ;  while  the  others  arc 
often  the  most  useful  in  the  work  of  edifying. 

It  has  been  pointed  out  elsewhere  that  Conversion 
is  not  to  be  confounded  with  Regeneration.  There  is 
no  necessary  connexion  between  the  two.  Sincere 
and  deep  conversions  took  place  under  the  Jewish 
dispensation;  we  might  almost  say  that  they  take 
place  under  still  less  perfect  systems ;  but  regenera- 
tion is  the  peculiar  privilege  of  Christianity.  Con- 
version may  either  begin  before  the  act  of  regenera- 
tion, as  in  the  life  of  S.  Paul ;  or  it  may  follow  after, 
as  in  that  of  S.  Francis  and  many  others  who  have 
been  baptized  in  infancy.  Regeneration  is  a  meta- 
physical change,  altering  a  man's  nature:  conversion 
is  a  moral  change,  altering  a  man's  character.  The 
one  gives  him  new  faculties,  and  a  new  sphere  in 


Conversion  and  Regeneration,  363 


which  to  exercise  them:  the  other  gives  a  new 
direction  to  wha-tever  faculties  he  has.  Though  un- 
questionably regeneration,  which  makes  us  children 
of  God,  is  a  higher  benefit  than  conversion,  which 
makes  us  begin  to  be  good  men,  yet,  unless  it  be 
preceded,  or  accompanied,  or  followed  by  conversion, 
it  will  avail  a  man  nothing,  or  rather  increase  his 
damnation.  Conversion,  on  the  other  hand,  though 
through  lack  of  opportunity,  or  through  ignorance 
and  prejudice,  it  may  not  be  crowned  in  this  life  by 
regeneration,  is  assured  of  a  true  salvation  hereafter. 
Of  the  two,  therefore,  the  one  which  is  intrinsically 
the  less,  is  the  more  essential  to  the  soul's  welfare. 
Conversion  without  Baptism  does  not  place  the  soul 
in  the  same  position  as  if  it  had  received  Baptism ; 
but  Baptism  without  conversion  does  not  place  the 
soul  in  the  same  position  as  if  it  had  been  converted. 
Allowing  to  conversion  its  largest  diversity  of  form 
and  circumstance  and  degree,  we  must  assert  that  it 
is,  in  the  widest  acceptation,  generally  necessary  to 
salvation."  Our  Lord  was  not  using  the  term  in  the 
special  sense  which  it  has  acquired  in  modern  systems, 
but  He  laid  down  a  principle  which  may  be  applied 
whenever  a  soul  has  not  yet  adopted  a  right  attitude 
towards  God,  when  He  said,  Except  ye  be  converted 
and  become  as  little  children,  ye  shall  in  no  wise  enter 
into  the  kingdom  of  heaven (S.  Matt,  xviii.  3). 

%  8- 

Justification,  according  to  the  strict  meaning  of 
the  word  as  used  in  Scripture,  is  God  s  declaration  of 


364        y ustification :  its  Definition. 


the  souls  freedom  from  guilt.  It  is  both  less  and 
more  than  forgiveness.  The  word  does  not  contain 
that  touching  element  of  personal  love  which  is  felt 
in  forgiveness ;  but  at  the  same  time  it  brings  out 
more  clearly  the  abolition  and  real  undoing  of  sin. 
It  is  a  forensic  word,  expressing  the  view  which  God 
takes  of  the  soul  in  His  character  of  Judge.  It  is  the 
opposite  of  condemning.  When  He  justifies,  He 
declares  not  guilty.  If  Koman  theologians  differ  from 
us  concerning  the  grounds  of  justification,  it  is  mainly 
because  it  has  become  traditional  with  them  to  give  a 
different  definition  of  the  word  itself,  which  they 
practically  identify  with  Sanctification.  That  being 
so,  it  could  not  be  expected  that  they  should  be  in 
agreement  with  us  about  the  terms  on  which  it  is 
given.  Nevertheless,  the  most  hopeful  way  of  coming 
to  an  understanding  will  be  to  adhere  to  the  ascer- 
tainable sense  of  the  word  in  Scripture,  where  it  has 
nothing  to  do  with  the  process  by  which  the  soul  is 
made  righteous,  but  with  the  act,  or  mental  attitude, 
which  recognises  the  soul  as  righteous.  It  must, 
however,  be  frankly  acknowledged  that  a  righteous 
Judge  cannot  possibly  recognise  a  soul  as  righteous 
when  it  is  not  so.  If  therefore  God  justifies  any  man 
in  the  Scriptural  sense  of  the  word,  it  must  be  because 
tlie  man  is  previously  in  course  of  being  justified  in 
the  Koman  sense, — because,  that  is,  an  active  prin- 
ciple  of  righteousness  is  infused  into  him. 

This  brings  us  at  once  to  the  terms  or  grounds  of 
justification.  In  the  New  Testament  we  are  said  to 
be  justified  hy  our  faith,  l)y  our  works,  and  by  our 


The  Grounds  of  it  variously  stated,  365 


words.  These  three  things  correspond  to  the  usual 
division  of  human  activity  into  thought,  word,  and 
deed.  It  is  obvious  that  the  deepest  of  the  three  is 
that  which  lies  hidden  in  the  secret  places  of  the 
heart,  and  that  the  outward  manifestations  of  word 
and  deed  are  only  of  moral  value  in  so  far  as  they 
truly  represent  what  is  passing  within.  This  is  best 
seen  in  the  case  of  the  most  superficial  of  all,  namely 
words.  If  our  Lord  says,  "  Every  idle  word  which 
men  shall  speak,  they  shall  give  account  thereof  in 
the  day  of  judgment ;  for  by  thy  words  thou  shalt  be 
justified,  and  by  thy  words  thou  shalt  be  condemned," 
it  is  because  of  the  reason  alleged  a  few  verses  before. 
For  out  of  the  abundance  of  the  heart  the  mouth 
speaketh  "  (S.  Matt.  xii.  84,  37).  But  the  same  prin- 
ciple applies  to  actions  also.  While  action  is  the  best, 
indeed  the  only  test  of  inward  purpose,  it  is  not — at 
least  so  far  as  men  are  judges — an  infallible  one. 
Men  may  deceive  by  deeds  as  well  as  by  words ;  and 
what  are  in  themselves  good  works,  whether  of  mercj^ 
or  of  piety,  or  of  self-discipline,  may  be  the  cloak  in 
which  self-sufficiency,  and  spiritual  pride,  and  schem- 
ing hypocrisy,  array  themselves.  Clearly  if  men  are 
justified  by  their  works,  as  S.  James  teaches, — or  are 
condemned  by  them  either, — it  cannot  be  purely  on 
account  of  the  intrinsic  nature  of  the  works,  but  on 
account  of  the  spirit  in  which  they  are  done.  The 
spirit  which  must  inspire  such  words  and  works  as 
will  justify  a  man  in  God's  eyes,  is  the  spirit  of  faith. 
By  faith  alone  are  we  justified,  not  by  faith  j)liis 
something  else  of  a  different  and  an  opposite  cha- 


366         justification  by  Faith  alone. 


racter,  such  as  works  o£  law  "  (Rom.  iii.  28)  would 
be.  Faith  truly  lodged  in  the  heart  by  the  grace  o£ 
God  cannot  fail  to  produce  faithful  works  and  words  ; 
and  by  such  evidence  of  the  vitality  of  our  faith  God 
will  try  us :  but  "  works  of  law,"  done  on  the  Semi- 
pelagian  principle  of  which  we  have  spoken, — done 
2JToprio  motu  with  a  view  of  ingratiating  ourselves 
with  God,  to  merit  His  justifying  regard, — these  are 
not  only  no  sign  of  faith,  but  an  indication  of  its 
absence,  and  therefore  invite  condemnation,  not 
approval. 

Faith,  therefore,  is  that  active  principle  of  right- 
eousness which,  as  we  have  said,  must  be  infused  into 
us  before  we  can  be  accounted  righteous  before  God. 
It  is  the  abandonment  of  the  false  theory  that  we  can 
set  things  right  for  ourselves,  or  make  our  own  wills 
independent  and  self -supplying  fountains  of  holiness. 
It  casts  us  upon  Him  "  who  of  God  was  made  to  us 
righteousness (1  Cor.  i.  30),  as  well  as  sanctification 
and  redemption.  Living  communion  with  God  and 
willing  dependence  upon  Him  would  have  been  neces- 
sary to  our  justification  if  we  had  never  fallen.  It  is 
at  least  equally  necessary  to  us  now  that  we  are  weak 
through  the  Fall.  But  our  justification  is  the  justifi- 
cation of  men  who  are  not  only  weak,  but  who  have 
actually  been  guilty.  The  faith  therefore  which  is 
required  to  justify  us  is  not  simply  a  general  reliance 
upon  the  character  of  God.  It  includes  a  recognition 
of  our  sin,  and  a  concurrence  in  God  s  judgment  upon 
it ;  and  it  attaches  itself  with  all  its  force  to  the 
Atonement   made   by  Christ.     However  little  the 


Its  Relation  to  the  Atonement.  367 


sinner  may  be  able  to  explain  the  nature  of  what 
Christ  did  for  us  upon  the  Cross,  he  apprehends  by 
faith  that  Christ  died  for  liim,  and  that  all  his  hopes 
lie  in  that  one  fact.  He  knows  that,  do  what  he 
would,  he  could  not  have  delivered  his  soul  from  the 
guilt  which  by  his  own  fault  he  had  brought  upon  it, 
but  that  in  a  way  known  only  to  Christ  and  the 
Father,  and  to  the  Holy  Spirit  who  applies  the  work 
of  Christ,  Christ  has  indeed  done  it.  He  has  nothing 
to  plead  on  his  own  behalf, — not  his  sorrow  for  sin, 
not  his  confession  of  it,  not  what  he  has  done  to  make 
up  for  it, — but  only  that  Christ  has  borne  it,  and  shed 
His  Blood  for  it.  And  as  the  thought  of  Christ's 
Atonement  enters  deeper  and  deeper  into  his  heart,  he 
naturally,  without  any  forcing,  dies  to  sin  with  Christ, 
so  that  sin  actually  loses  its  hold  upon  him,  and 
becomes  extinguished.  Nor  is  this  all.  S.  Paul  in- 
cludes as  an  element  in  saving  faith  the  conviction 
"  that  God  raised  the  Lord  J esus  from  the  dead 
(Eom.  X.  9).  It  is  not  to  a  past  fact  that  we  cling, 
not  to  a  dead  Christ.  It  is  to  One  living  and  trium- 
phant, who  not  only  thought  of  us  and  our  sins  upon 
the  Cross,  but  who  thinks  of  us  now,  and  is  not  only 
near  us,  but  in  us.  Such  faith  has  more  than  the 
negative  virtue  of  expelling  sin ;  it  has  the  positive 
virtue  of  appropriating  the  risen  life  of  Christ. 
Realised  union  with  Him,  acquired  by  no  merits  of 
ours,  but  involving  a  willing  conformity  to  Him,  is 
assuredly  a  ground  on  which  a  righteous  God  can 
justify  the  greatest  of  sinners.  Nor  need  He  hold  His 
justification  in  reserve  until  faith  has  had  its  perfect 


368 


Its  Relation  to  Baptism. 


work.  The  earliest  beginnings  of  such  a  faith  are 
met  by  a  recognition  that  guilt  has  completely  passed 
away,  because  that  new  principle  which  is  at  work  in 
the  soul  is  the  pledge  of  future  perfection. 

It  will  be  seen  from  the  foregoing  that  there  is  a 
close  connexion  between  Justification  and  Baptism. 
Sometimes,  in  Holy  Scripture,  justification  is  spoken  of 
as  a  thing  still  future ;  then,  it  is,  of  course,  in  view 
of  the  day  of  final  judgment.  Sometimes  it  is  spoken 
of  as  present,  because  the  lives  of  true  Christians  pass 
continually  under  review  before  God,  and  He  con- 
tinually gives  the  same  sentence  upon  them.  But 
sometimes  it  is  spoken  of  as  a  thing  done  once  for 
all  in  the  past.  In  that  case  it  belongs  to  the  moment 
when  the  believer  first  received  incorporation  into 
Christ, — the  moment  when  "the  old  things  passed 
away"  (2  Cor.  v.  17).  After  the  Apostle  has  described 
the  vileness  of  the  natural  life,  he  adds,  "  And  such 
were  some  of  you ;  but  ye  did  wash,  but  ye  were 
consecrated,  but  ye  were  justified  in  the  Name  of  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  and  in  the  Spirit  of  our  God " 
(1  Cor.  vi.  11).  It  is  evident  that  he  refers  to  the 
period  of  Baptism.  There  is  no  reason  to  doubt  that 
justification  is  as  freely  given  in  the  Baptism  of 
infants  as  in  that  of  grown  men;  but  of  course,  on 
coming  to  years  of  discretion,  the  child  must  secure  it 
for  himself  by  active  faith  and  obedience,  lest  it  sliould 
slip  from  him. 


Peace  and  Assurance, 


369 


§9- 

"  The  work  o£  righteousness/'  says  the  Evangelical 
Prophet,  "  shall  be  peace ;  and  the  effect  of  righteous- 
ness quietness  and  assurance  for  ever  "  (Isa.  xxxii.  17). 
This  is  so  in  the  normal  state  of  things ;  but  Protes- 
tant teachers  have  often  confused  and  troubled  con- 
sciences by  identifying  the  objective  and  the  subjective 
sides  of  justification.  They  speak  of  it  sometimes  as 
if  "justification  by  faith''  meant  the  soul's  con- 
sciousness of  its  own  justification.  This  is  a  great 
mistake,  and  has  led  to  the  opinion,  often  harshly 
insisted  on,  that  no  man  is  justified  without  knowing 
it.  As  we  have  already  pointed  out,  justification  is 
an  act  or  attitude  of  God  towards  the  soul ;  and  it  by 
no  means  follows  of  necessity  that  the  soul  realises 
what  that  attitude  is.  Thousands  of  souls  are  truly 
justified  before  God  though  living  in  great  fear  and 
doubt  about  their  acceptance  with  Him.  Neverthe- 
less such  souls  are  living  beneath  their  privilege. 
"  Having  been  justified  by  faith,"  says  S.  Paul,  "  let 
us  have  peace  with  God  through  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ "  (Rom.  v.  1).  It  gives  greater  glory  to  God, 
and  afibrds  greater  facility  for  progress  in  holiness, 
when  the  soul  can  boldly  and  humbly  take  God  at  His 
word,  and  rest  peacefully  upon  the  work  of  Christ, 
and,  while  grieving  over  its  sins,  grieve  over  them 
as  forgiven  and  put  away,  not  as  a  still  incumbent 
burden.  Such  an  assurance  about  its  present  state 
the  soul  ought  to  have.  Assurance  about  the  future 
is  a  very  difierent  thing. 

2  B 


370  Nature  of  Sandification. 


%  10. 

That  infusion  of  the  new  principle  of  righteousness 
which  qualifies  us  for  justification,  is  the  beginning  of 
the  lifelong  process  which  we  understand  by  Sancti- 
fication.  Here  (as  in  the  case  of  Conversion)  we  need 
not  be  tied  by  formal  definitions,  because  the  word 
with  which  we  are  dealing  has  no  fixed  theological 
value  in  the  New  Testament ; — where  it  sometimes 
means  an  act  of  consecration,  sometimes  an  act  of 
purification,  sometimes  a  recognition  of  holiness,  as 
well  as  the  process  of  which  we  have  to  speak.  But 
we  take  it  to  mean  the  actual  formation  of  a  holy 
character,  the  progressive  development  of  likeness  to 
Christ.  As  such,  the  very  idea  is  opposed  to  those 
spasmodic  efforts  by  which  some  sectarians  have 
sought  to  obtain  it,  as  if  it  were  a  second  gift  like 
regeneration,  a  "  baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost "  as  they 
say,  capable  of  being  obtained  and  fixed  in  a  moment. 
There  are,  no  doubt,  special  seasons  which  serve  as 
crises  in  the  life  of  grace,  when  the  soul, — as  in  a 
Retreat,  for  instance, — stirs  itself  up  to  be  completely 
delivered  to  the  Spirit  of  God.  But  character  is 
not  formed  by  isolated  and  convulsive  movements, — 
though  they  may  give  an  impetus  to  the  formation, — 
but  by  constant  practice  and  habitual  exercise.  Sanc- 
tification,  therefore,  is  founded  first  in  a  regular  and 
diligent  use  of  the  means  of  grace,  whereby  the  Chris- 
tian absorbs  into  himself  the  riclmess  and  strength  of 
the  life  of  Christ.  Tlicn,  the  virtues  which  have  thus 
been  taken  into  the  spiritual  system,  must  be  put  to 


Its  gradual  Advance. 


371 


the  proof  and  called  out  in  the  daily  trials  and  duties 
which  Providence  appoints.  Temptation  is  the  natural 
way  by  which  the  Christian  heart  is  at  once  tested 
and  educated ;  and  painful  as  the  struggle  with  it  is, 
the  Apostle  bids  us  count  it  all  joy  "  when  we  have 
to  go  through  such  temptation  as  comes  to  us  by  no 
fault  of  our  own  (S.  James  i.  2),  because  of  the  good 
result  which  it  brings  when  rightly  used.  The  name 
of  temptation,  however,  must  not  be  unduly  restricted. 
There  is  not  only  a  temptation  to  do  wrong,  but  also 
to  leave  right  alone;  and  the  development  of  the 
Christian  character  consists  equally  in  mortifying 
corrupt  impulses  and  in  giving  free  play  to  all 
wholesome  ones.  The  talents  committed  to  us  must 
be  made  good  use  of,  and  we  must  become  actively 
serviceable  in  the  Church  of  God. 

Sanctification  is  thus  seen  to  be  the  deliberate 
work  of  the  Christian  man  himself.  He  cannot  be 
sanctified  without  his  own  diligent  co-operation.  And 
yet,  on  any  true  theory  of  grace,  it  is  the  work  of 
the  Holy  Ghost  upon  him  all  the  while.  It  is  only 
by  faith,  not  by  "  works,''  that  a  man  is  sanctified, 
inasmuch  as  any  attempt  to  perfect  ourselves  inde- 
pendently of  grace  can  only  result  in  Pharisaism  or 
Stoicism.  The  Imitation  of  Christ,  therefore,  must 
always  be  balanced  by  a  living  dependence  upon  Him. 

In  some  measure  the  work  of  Sanctification  must 
be  going  forward  in  all  who  are  to  be  saved.  The 
title  of  saints  belongs  in  the  New  Testament  to  all 
the  baptized,  because  they  have  all  been  set  apart 
and  consecrated.    But  the  instinct  of  the  Church  has 


372    Special  Development  in  the  Saints. 


inclined  to  reserve  the  title  for  those  who  may  be 
called  the  elect  of  the  elect, — for  those  in  whom  the 
power  of  grace  has  been  most  conspicuously  shewn 
and  has  been  most  perfectly  responded  to.  Even 
amongst  the  members  of  the  Church,  the  Holy  Ghost 
appears  to  find  "chosen  vessels,"  in  whom  He 
becomes  more  deeply  interested  than  in  the  rest,  as 
He  sees  them  capable  of  a  greater  external  work,  or 
of  a  more  exquisite  internal  finish.  These  are,  in  a 
vspecial  sense,  the  Saints.  Amongst  them  there  have 
been  wide  differences  in  experience  and  training,  and 
none  but  the  Divine  eye  is  able  to  discern  at  the  out- 
set who  will  become  Saints.  God  takes  some  of  them 
from  among  the  most  apparently  hardened  sinners, 
like  S.  Paul,  and  S.  Mary  Magdalene,  and  S.  Austin ; 
while  some  are  trained  from  infancy  in  ways  of  sweet- 
ness and  purity,  like  the  blessed  Virgin  herself,  and 
S.  Polycarp,  and  S.  Bernard.  Not  all  the  Saints 
have  been  free  from  doctrinal  errors ;  and  there  have 
been  not  a  few  instances  where  the  grace  of  God  has 
triumphed  even  over  the  obstacles  of  schism,  and 
made  true  Saints  who  were  not  in  visible  communion 
with  the  Catholic  Church.  It  is  a  rough  and  external 
standard  which  only  reckons  as  Saints  those  who  are 
attested  to  have  worked  miracles,  and  which  canonizes 
mainly  with  a  view  to  invocation.  The  Church  on 
earth  can  make  no  final  judgment  amongst  those 
that  have  passed  into  Paradise,  but  it  is  her  duty  to 
cherish  the  memory  of  those  who  have  in  other  days 
borne  signal  witness  ta  Christ. 


Final  Perseverance. 


373 


§  11- 

The  theory  that  a  soul  once  in  grace  remains 
always  in  grace  is  only  practically  true  and  cannot 
be  counted  on  infallibly.  It  is  true  that  when  the 
seed  of  eternal  life  has  once  germinated  properly  in 
a  soul,  and  has  made  good  growth,  the  soul  itself 
becomes  almost  incapable  of  a  final  desertion  of  God. 
Grace  obtains  a  hold  upon  it,  and  brings  it  into  a 
new  slavery, — that  service  of  God  which  is  perfect 
freedom.  The  soul  is  bound  to  Him  by  the  recollec- 
tion of  such  marvellous  mercies,  not  merely  heard  of, 
believed  in,  hoped  for,  but  actually  enjoyed,  that  it 
cannot  escape  from  their  strong  grip.  They  become 
a  powerful  factor  in  that  complex  setting  which  con- 
ditions a  man  s  freedom.  The  man  may  be  wayward 
and  foolish,  may  plunge  into  sin  and  even  abandon 
religious  practices  for  a  time ;  but  somehow  at  last  he 
remembers  himself  and  comes  back.  This  is  almost 
invariably  the  case, — so  much  so,  that  wherever  it 
appears  to  be  otherwise,  there  is  some  ground  for 
doubting  whether  the  soul  ever  really  knew  the  love 
of  God,  or  had  only  deceived  itself  when  it  thought  so. 
Something  like  a  miracle  of  evil  is  needed,  if  a  soul 
which  has  once  truly  embraced  the  Divine  promises 
is  to  be  torn  away  from  them  at  last. 

So  far,  as  a  matter  of  practical  observation,  there 
is  truth  in  what  is  called  the  doctrine  of  final  perse- 
verance, and  numbers  of  passages  in  Holy  Scripture 
bear  it  out.  But  it  is  just  when  it  passes  from  a 
fact  of  observation  into  a  dogma  of  necessity  that  it 


374    ^'^^  Doctrine  dogmatically  insecure. 


becomes  false  and  pernicious.  That  same  conscience 
which  is  serenely  assured  of  God's  present  forgiveness 
and  of  God's  unfaltering  purpose  with  regard  to  it, 
and  which  cannot  seriously  think  that  it  is  likely  to 
fall  away  from  Him  and  lose  its  eternal  life,  yet  bears 
witness  that  it  might  conceivably  do  so,  and  must 
take  heed  that  it  does  not.  The  thing  is  no  mechani- 
cal impossibility.  Nay,  a  fearful  experience  of  Satan's 
ways — his  long  sieges,  and  sudden  assaults,  and 
insidious  deceits — and  of  its  own  repeated  falls  before 
them,  shews  the  soul  how  readily  it  might  be  taken  an 
irrecoverable  captive.  It  dares  not  take  things  easily. 
If  saved  at  all,  it  sees  that  it  will  be  "  scarcely  saved  " 
(1  Pet.  iv.  18) ;  and  to  the  last  it  stands  in  fear. 
When  it  turns  to  the  Bible,  it  finds  its  fears  as  faith- 
fully echoed  as  its  hopes.  If  on  one  page  it  reads, 
^'They  shall  never  perish,  neither  shall  any  pluck 
them  out  of  My  hand"  (S.  John  x.  28),  it  reads  on 
another,  "  It  is  impossible  to  renew  unto  repentance 
those  who  were  once  enlightened  and  tasted  of  the 
heavenly  gift,  and  then  fell  away  "  (Heb.  vi.  4-C). 


Chapter  XI. 


Sa^t  ®§mg^* 

Probation  closed  by  Death — The  Intermediate  State — The  Resurrection 
of  the  Body — Chrisfs  Second  Coming  and  the  Signs  of  it — Nature  of 
the  Last  Judgment — The  Bliss  of  Heaven — Relation  of  the  Elect  to 
the  Mass  of  Mankind  hereafter — State  of  the  Lost — Final  Triumph 
of  Goodness, 

§1. 

This  period  of  the  earthly  hfe  is  our  time  of  pro- 
bation ;  and  so  far  as  our  present  knowledge  serves, 
there  is  no  other.  The  moral  bent  is  sufficiently 
exhibited  here,  and  we  have  no  warrant  for  teaching 
that  it  can  be  radically  altered  elsewhere.  S.  Austin 
lays  it  down,  that  no  sacrifices  which  the  Church  can 
offer  are  of  any  avail  for  those  who  have  departed  with- 
out at  least  the  rudiments  of  faith  and  repentance. 
The  thought  that  impenitent  wickedness  will  have 
another  chance,  or  series  of  chances,  hereafter,  not 
only  weakens  the  force  of  fear  as  a  dissuasive  from 
sin,  but  it  appears  to  ijivolve  a  loss  in  the  opposite 
direction  as  well.  If  in  some  future  state,  men  may 
change  from  fixed  evil  to  good,  it  would  seem  arbitrary 
to  deny  that  they  might  change  from  fixed  good  to 
evil.    This  would  be  intolerable  to  the  Christia^n  heart 


376  Death  ends  Probation. 


and  conscience,  already  sorely  taxed.  Faith  demands, 
and  Scripture  gives  it  a  right  to  demand,  that  the 
judgment  founded  upon  conduct  in  this  life  should 
be  eternal  and  final,  and  that  probation  should  be  at 
an  end. 

But  this  life  is  far  more  than  a  probation;  it  is 
an  education,  a  discipline ;  and  this  aspect  of  existence 
by  no  means  ceases  at  death.  No  unfair  strain  is  put 
upon  S.  Paul's  language  by  supposing  that  he  dis- 
tinctly contemplated  a  progressive  work  of  grace  in 
the  soul  between  death  and  judgment.  "I  am  con- 
fident," he  says,  "  of  this  very  thing,  that  He  who 
began  in  you  a  good  work  will  accomplish  it  until  the 
day  of  Jesus  Christ"  (Phil.  i.  6).  While,  therefore, 
we  must  hesitate  to  affirm  that  souls  are  still  open  to 
begin  conversion  in  the  Intermediate  State,  we  may 
hope  that  many,  in  whom  conversion  was  very  imper- 
fect here,  will  then  be  ripened  to  such  a  degree  of 
perfection  as  they  are  found  capable  of.  There  is  a 
wide  difference  between  an  unawakened  state,  and  one 
of  wilfully  thwarting  God's  motions,  or  "  doing  despite 
unto  the  Spirit  of  Grace"  (Heb.  x.  29).  For  this 
latter  unhappy  class  we  are  told  of  no  fresh  kinds  of 
opportunity,  and  no  ways  of  retrieving  the  past.  But 
we  may  feel  confident  that  those  wills  which  were,  at 
last,  on  the  whole,  upon  the  right  side,  though  with 
no  strong  determination,  will  be  saved  by  being  here- 
after subjected  to  some  purifying  and  bracing  action 
of  God^s  love.  He  cannot  cast  away  even  the  unde- 
veloped germs,  or  the  shrunken  remains,  of  goodness. 

In  some  cases — perhaps  in  many — where  the  soul 


Death-bed  Awakenings.  377 


seems  likely  to  forfeit  the  grace  with  which  it  has 
trifled,  His  vigilant  Providence  sends — when  chastise- 
ment and  diseases  fail — a  hastened  and  punitive 
death,  "that  w^e  should  not  be  condemned  with  the 
world  "  (1  Cor.  xi.  32).  To  such  a  class  of  spirits,  as 
it  appears,  our  Lord  presented  Himself  in  the  interval 
between  His  death  and  resurrection,  and  preached  to 
them  His  Gospel  (1  Pet.  iii.  19,  20).  Gods  outraged 
patience  had  at  last  found  no  resource,  if  the  men  were 
to  be  saved  in  the  end,  but  to  sweep  them  indignantly 
off  the  face  of  the  earth.  It  may  be  that  in  the  very 
fears  and  agonies  of  death  some  vital  movement  of 
will  may  have  taken  place, — some  spiritual  cry  for 
mercy, — some  one  long  breath  of  penitence,  like  that 
breath  which  makes  the  difference  between  a  stillborn 
babe  and  one  that  has  had  a  moment  of  separate  exist- 
ence. And  that  single  flash  of  response  to  grace 
may  have  made  the  men  capable  of  education  and 
discipline  in  that  "  prison "  to  which  they  were 
removed.  While  death-bed  repentances  are  in  no  way 
to  be  counted  upon,  they  are  always  possible ;  and 
although  they  may  not  lead  to  anything  more  than 
the  minimum  of  salvation,  they  at  any  rate  avert  the 
ultimate  loss  of  the  soul. 

It  is  for  this  reason  that  the  Church  has  always 
laid  such  stress — sometimes  it  almost  looks  like  super- 
stition— upon  the  moral  and  spiritual  value  of  the  last 
moments,  seeking  to  stay  the  dying  man's  eyes  and 
heart  upon  the  Cross,  and,  even  if  the  man  himself  be 
unconscious  of  outward  things,  surrounding  him  w4th 
the  offices  of  religion,  invoking  from  God  the  ministry 


378 


Value  of  the  last  Moments. 


of  angels,  keeping  intense  the  intercessions  o£  the 
priesthood  and  o£  friends,  and  even  appealing  by  the 
passing  bell  to  the  sympathetic  help  of  strangers.  It 
is  not  only  that  the  moment  of  death  has  its  special 
temptations  and  dangers, — Satan  using  what  he  knows 
to  be  his  last  chance,  and  the  soul  itself  in  many 
cases  becoming  sensible  of  an  awful  loneliness ; — it 
is  not  only  that  the  moment  of  death,  especially  for 
those  who  have  shewn  little  previous  sign  of  grace, 
is,  as  we  have  said,  a  moment  of  unique  hopefulness. 
Death  is  the  last  test  of  the  soul's  direction.  God 
does  not  judge  us  by  the  way  we  die,  but  by  the  way 
we  live;  nevertheless,  as  any  previous  crisis  in  a 
man's  history  reveals  what  the  man  has  been  making 
of  himself  up  to  that  point,  so  also,  but  in  a  higher 
degree,  does  death.  The  way  we  have  lived  is 
gathered  up — not  for  man  s  judgment  but  for  God's — 
in  the  way  we  die 

§  2. 

But  little  is  revealed  to  us  concerning  the  condi- 
tion  of  those  who  die  in  grace,  in  the  interval  between 
death  and  resurrection.  Much  knowledge  on  the  sub- 
ject would  be  both  impossible  and  unprofitable  for 
us  now.  But  enough  light  is  vouchsafed  us  to  direct 
our  own  conduct,  and  to  give  us  comfort  in  thinking 
of  our  departed  friends.  Their  state  or  abode  some- 
times bears  the  title  of  Paradise  (S.  Luke  xxiii.  43), 
carrying  us  back  to  the  secluded  and  sinless  happi- 
ness of  tlie  first  beginnings  of  our  race ;  sometimes 
Abraham's  bosom  (S.  Luke  xvi.  22),  wliich  makes  us 


Names  of  the  Disembodied  State.  379 


think  of  the  maintenance  of  the  covenant  relation 
with  God,  and  of  the  protecting  patronage  of  our  great 
forefathers  in  the  faith.  Sometimes, — and  mainly  in 
quotations  from  the  Old  Testament, — it  is  simply  called 
Hades,  or  Hell,  answering  to  the  Hebrew  Sheol, — a 
neerative  word  which  would  include  the  state  of  all 
departed  spirits,  both  good  and  bad,  but  which  is 
never  used  without  a  sense  of  privation  and  incom- 
pleteness, easily  passing  into  the  darker  thoughts  of 
punishment  and  torment  (Rev.  xx.  13 ;  S.  Luke  xvi. 
23).  Once,  a  special  class  of  "  souls are  described 
as  lodged  ''beneath  the  altar,"  which  is  perhaps 
identical  with  the  Throne  (Rev.  vi.  9).  The  descrip- 
tion appears  to  indicate  the  sacrificial  nature  of  their 
martyrdom,  as  well  as  their  special  nearness  to  the 
Lamb ;  while  it  suggests  also  a  kind  of  confinement 
from  which  the  souls  would  be  glad  to  be  freed. 

The  first  characteristic  of  Christian  death  is  its 
restfulness.  They  rest  from  their  labours (Rev. 
xiv.  13).  In  one  aspect  of  it,  this  repose  belongs  to 
good  and  bad  alike,  and  is  simply  the  result  of  their 
disembodied  condition.^    The  body  is  the  instrument 

*  It  has  been  argued  by  some  that,  although  the  natural  body  is 
in  abeyance  and  the  S23iritnal  body  not  yet  given,  the  spirit  is  clothed 
meanwhile  with  some  temporary  organism  which  relieves  its  sense  of 
nakedness.  But  such  is  not  the  meaning  of  S.  Paul  in  the  passage  to 
which  reference  is  made,  but  rather  the  opposite.  The  Apostle  is 
weary  of  the  "  tabernacle  "  life  of  this  w^orld,  and,  if  it  must  be  so, 
would  rather  be  absent  from  the  body  "  in  order  to  be  present  with 
the  Lord."  But  there  was  a  third  alternative,  which,  if  he  might,  he 
would  choose  before  either.  It  was  tl^at  there  should  be  no  need  to  be 
stripped  at  all,  no  interval  between  the  tabernacle  and  the  heavenly 
house.  He  wished  that  Christ  might  return  before  he  died,  and  that 
instead  of  putting  off  his  earthly  dress,  he  might  be  "  clothed  upon,^ 


38o 


The  Restfulness  of  Paradise. 


of  moral  action  ;  and  when  once  it  is  taken  away,  the 
man,  for  weal  or  for  woe,  has  reached  that  "  night," 
which  our  Lord  speaks  of,  "  when  no  man  is  able 
to  work "  (S.  John  ix.  4).  Every  one  has  had  his 
"  twelve  hours "  (S.  John  xi.  9)  to  work  in  upon 
earth,  and  now  he  must  rest  perforce  until  the  new 
morning  comes,  and  leave  all  pi'actical  occupation. 
The  whirl  of  this  busy  life  is  at  an  end.  And  the 
body  is  also  the  medium  of  passive  impressions. 
These,  too,  are  left  behind.  The  dead  are  at  rest 
from  the  confusing  and  distracting  succession  of 
interests  and  excitements,  of  sensuous  pains  and 
pleasures.  No  fresh  temptations  can  assail  them. 
If  they  cannot  break  out  into  new  action,  nothing  can 
break  in,  to  disturb  them  with  new  troubles.  It  is 
this  absolute  stillness  of  the  dead  which  makes  us 
unable,  except  in  symbols  and  poetry,  to  picture  to 
ourselves  the  life  of  Paradise.  Purely  spiritual  exist- 
ence is  to  us  an  unimaginable  thing.  All  we  can  say 
about  it  is  that  every  circumstance  of  life  with  which 
we  are  acquainted  is  directly  reversed. 

But  it  would  be  totally  at  variance  with  Scripture 
to  suppose  that  the  departed,  because  they  are  in- 
capable of  positive  commerce  with  the  outer  world, 
must  therefore  be  in  a  state  of  swoon  or  abeyance. 
No  such  notion  is  intended  when  they  are  said  in 
the  Bible  to  have  fallen  asleep,  or  to  have  been  laid 
to  rest  (KoijULYiOrivai).    The  word  is  expressive  of  repose, 

that  is,  tliat  tho  now  vesture  might  corao  down  npon  the  old  and 
transform  it  into  itself,  "in  order  tliat  wliat  is  mortal  maybe  swallowed 
up  by  life"  (2  Cor.  v.  1-9). 


Its  Repose  not  Unconsciousness. 


381 


but  not  of  vacancy.  As  Christ,  on  passing  out  o£  this 
world  into  "  Hell,"  was  "  quickened  in  spirit "  (1  Pet. 
iii.  18),  so  are  others.  The  spirit  is  set  at  rest  from 
outward  activities  and  impressions  in  order  that  it 
may  be  free  to  develope  a  whole  world  of  inward 
consciousness.  It  is  shut  up  within  itself,  that  it 
may  have  no  alternative  but  to  contemplate  deeper 
facts.  Here,  we  have  had  hard  work  to  recall  our- 
selves from  what  is  phenomenal  to  what  is  real. 
But  to  the  dead  the  task  is  easy.  It  is  their  sole 
occupation.  Having  no  outlet  of  escape,  such  as  we 
have,  into  the  amusements  of  temporal  existence,  they 
sound  the  things  which  are  eternal.  The  "  breadth  " 
and  the  "  length  "  which  S.  Paul  speaks  of,  through 
which  they  have  roamed  before  and  through  which 
they  will  roam  again  more  freely  hereafter,  are  now 
inaccessible  to  them  ;  and  their  range  lies  in  exploring 
that  "  depth  "  which  S.  Athanasius  explained  to  be  the 
realm  of  the  dead  (Eph.  iii.  18). 

Now  it  is  impossible  to  suppose  that  spirits  can 
be  all  at  once  confronted  with  the  essential  verities 
of  existence  without  experiencing  emotion.  When 
no  veil,  no  medium,  no  sacrament  is  any  longer 
interposed,  but  things  are  borne  in  upon  the  naked 
ccinsciousness,  just  as  they  are ;  Avhen  it  is  no  longer 
possible  for  the  truth  to  be  evaded,  or  disguised,  or 
misapprehended ;  then  comes  an  awakening,  which 
even  for  the  Saints  must  mingle  terror  with  joy.  In 
proportion,  no  doubt,  as  men  have  lived  in  the  light 
of  the  Gospel  on  earth,  there  will  be  less  surprise  in 
the  revelation  which  death  makes,  and  the  delight 


382  Awfuhtess  of  Paradise. 


of  finding  tlie  trutli  of  tliose  tilings  which  were 
believed  will  overpower  the  pain  of  discovering  what 
was  before  unperceived.  Yet  the  vision  must  have 
in  it  something  appalKng  even  for  the  holiest.  S. 
Paul  had  had  a  foretaste  of  Paradise  (2  Cor.  xii.  4) ; 
and  he  spoke  of  that  awful  "depth/'  which  must 
then  have  opened  before  him,  as  a  thing  formidable 
enough  to  make  the  soul  reel,  and  lose  its  hold,  if 
it  were  not  for  the  love  of  God  in  Christ  which 
embraces  and  supports  it  (Rom.  viii.  39).  Although 
he  was  assured  that  passing  out  of  the  body  would 
bring  him  home  to  Christ,  yet  he  shrank  from  the 
necessity,  and  felt  that  it  needed  courage  (Oappovjuiev) 
to  choose  such  an  exposure  in  preference  to  the  life  of 
earth  (2  Cor.  v.  8). 

Among  the  facts  which  come  most  vividly  before 
the  consciousness  of  the  departed,  are  those  con- 
nected with  the  mystery  of  their  own  being.  For 
the  first  time,  the  man  fully  realises  what  he  is,  and 
how  he  came  to  be  what  he  is.  The  whole  history 
of  God's  merciful  dealings  with  him,  and  of  his  own 
narrow  escapes  from  self-perdition,  rises  up  before 
him.  He  learns  now  what  his  sins  have  cost,  in  the 
strong  light  of  the  Presence  of  Him  who  bore  them. 
"  Thou  hast  set  our  misdeeds  before  Thee,"  says  the 
funeral  Psalm,  "  and  our  secret  sins  in  the  light  of 
Thy  countenance"  (Ps.  xc.  8).  The  fact  that  that 
Countenance  beams  upon  the  pardoned  sinner  with 
love  surpassing  all  previous  conception,  does  not  take 
away  from  him  all  remorse  for  his  wrongdoing.  On 
the  contrary,  it  adds  poignancy  to  it.    Death  ushers 


Its  Purgatorial  Aspect.  383 


the  Christian  into  a  state  of  profound  penitence. 
While  he  was  on  earth,  his  penitence  was  mixed  with 
alarms  for  his  salvation,  which  relieved  the  sense  of 
the  intrinsic  horribleness  of  the  sin.  But  when  all 
anxiety  about  the  future  is  over,  the  spirit  is  able 
disinterestedly  to  enter  into  the  feelings  of  the  holy 
Redeemer  with  regard  to  the  sins  which  He  bore.  It 
then  understands  the  prophetic  promise ;  "  that  thou 
mayest  remember,  and  be  confounded,  and  never 
open  thy  mouth  any  more,  because  of  thy  shame, 
when  I  am  pacified  toward  thee  for  all  that  thou 
hast  done"  (Ezek.  xvi.  68).  And  whereas  on  earth 
penitence  was  able  in  som.e  measure  to  appease  its 
cravings  by  earnest  action,  it  no  longer  has  that 
resource.  S.  Bernard  well  points  out, — though  he 
has  chiefly  the  lost  in  view, — how  keen  a  difference 
the  absence  of  the  body  makes;  so  that  the  man  is 
forced  to  taste  the  hatefulness  of  his  acts  without 
being  able  to  repair  them  (paenitentiam  haberi,  non 
agi).  No  purgatorial  flames  that  are  imagined,  could 
cause  such  anguish  as  this  sword  of  penitence  which 
both  rends  and  mends  the  soul. 

The  doctrine  of  Purgatory  as  taught  in  the  Roman 
communion  expresses  these  truths  in  a  parable ;  but 
it  also  introduces  ideas  which  are  quite  foreign  to  the 
Gospel.  There  are,  no  doubt,  diversities  of  discipline 
to  be  undergone  between  death  and  judgment,  suited 
to  the  diversities  of  thos-e  who  are  to  be  disciplined ; 
but  such  a  purgatory  as  Scripture  teaches  us  to  think 
of  has  nothing  retributive  in  it.  It  is  not  different 
from  Paradise.    The  spirit  passes  into  no  more  exile 


384        The  Timelessness  of  Paradise. 


from  the  face  of  Christ,  or  from  His  felt  grasp.  "  The 
souls  of  the  righteous  are  in  the  hand  of  God,  and 
there  shall  no  torment  touch  them "  (Wisd.  iii.  1). 
All  that  is  sharp  in  it  is  of  the  spirit's  voluntary  and 
natural  self -infliction,  by  the  help  of  grace.  There  are 
few  good  Christians  who  think  that  they  have  had 
penitence  enough  in  this  life.  As  a  rule,  they  long 
to  have  a  deeper  sense  of  their  forgiven  sins,  and 
would  desire  some  space  for  reflexion  and  recollec- 
tion, some  leisure  for  purging  and  shriving,  before 
presenting  themselves  for  the  final  judgment.  Such 
an  opportunity  is  given,  when  our  Lord  says  to  the 
departing  faithful,  "  Come,  My  people,  enter  thou  into 
thy  chambers,  and  shut  thy  doors  about  thee;  hide 
thyself  for  a  little  moment,  until  the  indignation  be 
overpast "  (Isa.  xxvi.  20). 

The  life  of  Paradise  being  lived  in  memory  on 
the  one  hand,  and  in  expectation  on  the  other,  can 
hardly  be  said  to  have  a  present.  "Their  works 
follow  them ; "  so  the  Apocalypse  describes  the  one 
aspect  of  it: — "And  they  cried  with  a  loud  voice, 
saying,  How  long,  0  Lord  ? "  so  it  describes  the 
other.  Where  successive  actions  are  impossible,  and 
the  seasons  of  the  natural  world  are  not  felt,  our 
temporal  divisions  are  unknown.  To  speak,  as  in 
the  language  of  Indulgences,  of  years  or  days  in  this 
connexion,  must  be  purely  figurative,  if  it  has  any 
sense  at  all.  Whatever  measurements  the  spirits  of 
the  departed  have,  must  be  of  a  subjective  and 
internal  kind.  In  all  probability  it  is  the  same  to 
them  whether  a  thousand  years  have  elapsed  on 


The  imttual  Fellowship  of  the  Dead,  385 


earth  since  they  left  it,  or  only  a  few  minutes. 
When,  therefore,  we  speak  of  their  state  as  a  state 
of  progress  and  education,  we  do  not  tie  ourselves 
to  an  earthly  mode  of  progress,  gauged  by  length 
of  time.  There  is  no  reason  to  suppose  that  the 
Saints  pass  through  their  intermediate  state  more 
quickly,  in  the  temporal  sense  of  the  word,  than 
ordinary  Christians,  or  enter  the  joys  of  heaven 
before  the  end  of  the  world. 

The  strange  isolation  of  the  dead  from  all  external 
intercourse  with  other  persons  and  things  does  not 
really  make  them  solitary.  It  leads  them  to  a  far 
more  profound  communion  with  each  other  and  with 
us.  In  this  life  we  only  guess  at  the  meaning  of 
the  Fellowship  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  They  know  it 
by  a  direct  experience.  Here,  we  conjecture  one 
another's  meaning  through  signs  and  words  and 
looks,  and  often  misinterpret  them.  There,  they 
read  clearly,  seeing  the  truth  of  things  in  Christ. 
The  outward  events  of  this  world's  history  do  not 
affect  them ;  but  the  spiritual  bearings  of  those  events 
no  doubt  affect  them  deeply. 

This  is  involved  in  their  relations  with  Christ,  the 
closeness  of  which  is  brought  out  in  every  passage  of 
Scripture  which  deals  with  the  subject  at  all.  When 
the  believer  dies,  he  ''goes  to  rest  through  Jesus" 
(1  Thess.  iv.  14),  because  it  is  Jesus  that  prepares 
his  place  of  repose  and  conducts  him  to  it.  He  "  dies 
in  the  Lord  "  (Rev.  xiv.  13),  because  death  does  not 
carry  him  outside  of  that  sacred  union  in  which  he 
has  lived.     His  parting  cry  is,  ''Lord  Jesu,  receive 

2  c 


386       Their  Relationship  with  Christ. 


my  spirit "  (Acts  vii.  59),  because,  however  grea.t  the 
submission  to  Christ  has  been  before,  the  spirit  now 
springs  absolutely  into  His  keeping,  to  have  no 
independent  life  of  its  own.  Yet  it  is  not  lost  in 
Him.  It  departs  to  "  be  with  Christ (aOv,  Phil.  i.  23), 
as  still  a  separate  personality,  capable  of  enjoying  the 
privilege  of  being  in  the  same  place  where  He  is. 
And  He  promises  that  it  shall  "  be  with "  Him  in 
more  than  a  local  sense  in  Paradise  (/uer  Ifxov,  S.  Luke 
xxiii.  43) :  it  shall  have  a  sense  of  companionship 
with  Him,  and  of  sharing  His  fortunes.  Nor  does 
the  spirit  of  the  believer  feel  that  its  sojourn  there 
in  His  company  is  either  precarious  or  unobserved. 
He  is  "  at  home  with  the  Lord (Iv'^^fxnaai  irpog,  2  Cor. 
V.  8),  in  reciprocal  intercourse  with  Him,  in  mansions 
which  are  his  true  and  native  abode,  because  they  are 
Christ's  to  begin  with.  When  his  stay  in  that  par- 
ticular "  mansion "  of  the  Father's  house  is  ended, 
"Godwin  bring"  him,  still  "with  Jesus"  (1  Thess. 
iv.  14),  to  that  more  complete  state  in  which  body 
and  spirit  together  will  have  the  fruition  of  eternal 
fellowship  with  Christ. 

No  prayers  which  we  can  offer  for  the  Christian 
dead  accord  better  with  this  view  than  that  which  the 
English  Church  puts  in  our  lips,  that  God's  kingdom 
may  be  hastened,  so  that  they  and  we  alike  may  have 
our  perfect  consummation,  botli  in  body  and  soul.  But 
any  other  petitions  which  we  please  to  offer  for  them, 
we  may  freely  ofFer,  provided  that  we  offer  them  sub- 
ject to  those  general  laws  of  prayer  whicli  have  been 
laid  down  elsewhere.    It  is  a  cruel  wrong  to  Christian 


Prayers  for  the  Dead. 


387 


mourners  when  they  are  deterred  from  pouring  out 
their  hearts  in  prayer  for  the  dead.  God  is  a  Father, 
and  would  have  us  tell  Him  everything  we  feel.  If 
there  is  any  desire  in  our  minds  which  we  dare  not 
bring  to  Him,  we  ought  not  to  retain  it  at  all.  Every- 
thing that  we  may  legitimately  wish  for,  we  may 
reverently  ask.  We  may  not  ask  for  things  which 
God  makes  it  plain  that  He  does  not  will, — such  as 
the  return  of  the  dead  to  this  corruptible  life,  or 
communication  with  them  in  superstitious  and  for- 
bidden ways.  Nor  ought  we  to  make  definite  peti- 
tions based  on  uncertain  knowledge  of  the  facts,  or  at 
least  we  must  make  them  with  great  reserve.  But 
it  is  safe,  with  S.  Paul,  to  ask  for  the  departed 
''mercy  in  that  day"  (2  Tim.  i.  18),  or  with  the 
Psalmist,  that  they  and  their  past  afflictions  may  be 
''remembered"  (Ps.  cxxxii.  1).  Rest,  peace,  refresh- 
ment; light  perpetual,  the  favour  of  the  Divine 
regard ;  a  portion  with  the  Saints  ;  a  joyful  resurrec- 
tion and  a  merciful  judgment ; — these  are  the  kind  of 
requests  which  ancient  piety  was  accustomed  to  make 
for  them.  Nor  can  it  be  unavailing  and  superfluous 
to  offer  such  prayers.  No  doubt  a  disproportionate 
amount  of  time  and  energy  has  sometimes  been 
devoted  to  them,  and  in  the  fifteenth  century  the 
deliverance  of  the  dead  from  the  pains  of  purgatory 
seemed  to  have  become  the  main  object  of  the  Mass. 
The  dead  do  not  need  the  succour  of  the  prayers  of  the 
living  in  the  same  way  as  those  do  who  are  still  liable 
to  temptation,  and  whose  salvation  is  not  yet  assured. 
But  our  prayers  are  of  use  to  them  in  their  progress. 


388       The  Resurrection  of  the  Body. 


To  omit  the  mention  of  them  in  the  devotions  of  the 
Christian  Church  on  earth  would  imply  that  all  con- 
nexion between  them  and  us  had  ceased.  Nothing 
could  be  more  untrue. 

§  3. 

The  Church  knows  no  special  doctrine  of  the 
Immortality  of  the  Soul,  such  as  philosophers  have 
imagined.  Her  doctrine  is  that  of  the  future  Immor- 
tality of  the  Man.  Though  she  teaches  the  continuous 
existence  and  consciousness  of  the  spirit  in  Paradise, 
the  man,  during  that  period,  must  be  regarded  as 
dead.  So  our  Blessed  Lord  says  of  Himself,  "  I  am 
the  living  one,  and  I  became  dead;  and  behold,  I 
am  living  for  evermore''  (Rev.  i.  18).  But  as  death 
is  not  annihilation,  so  the  return  to  life  is  not  the 
recovery  of  anything  so  unsatisfying  as  existence 
without  a  body  would  be  to  men.  Life,  in  Christian 
language,  is  a  more  vigorous  and  substantial  thing. 
Human  life  requires  an  organism  for  its  completion 
and  manifestation ;  and  therefore  any  doctrine  of 
human  immortality  must  presuppose  a  Resurrection 
of  the  Body.  When  arguing  with  the  Sadducees,  who 
rejected  the  belief,  our  Lord  convicted  them  of  a  great 
and  twofold  error.  They  erred  concerning  "the 
power  of  God,"  not  believing  that  He  was  able  to 
raise  the  dead  to  life,  because  they  had  no  notion  of 
any  bodily  life  that  could  transcend  this ;  and  they 
erred  in  not  knowing  the  Scriptures."  The  reasoning 
of  Jesus  from  the  Scriptures  is  not  immediately  clear, 
but  the  very  assumptions  which  it  makes  are  most 


Christ's  Argument  with  the  Sadditcees.  389 


instructive.  Many  years  after  the  death  of  the 
Patriarchs,  He  says,  God  still  speaks  of  Himself  as 
their  God.  It  might  have  been  supposed  that  He 
called  Himself  so  because  He  was  their  God  while 
they  lived.  But  deeper  reflexion  shews  that  such  a 
bond  as  had  been  formed  between  God  and  the 
Patriarchs  could  not  be  a  momentary  and  perishable 
thing.  Creatures  so  made  in  the  image  of  God  as  to 
be  capable  of  friendship  with  Him,  and  actually 
admitted  to  it,  could  not  pass  out  of  existence  and 
be  forgotten.  Therefore  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob 
were  still  alive; — indeed  it  Avas  the  case  with  all 
the  dead,  "for  all  live  unto  Him.''  But  this  involves 
a  still  further  thought.  If  those  Patriarchs,  though 
dead,  are  still  alive,  not  as  memories  in  the  retrospect 
of  God,  but  as  personal  existences,  it  must  be  by  virtue 
of  a  coming  resurrection.  The  spirit  of  Abraham  by 
itself  is  not  Abraham,  any  more  than  the  body  of 
Abraham  is.  Therefore,  if  God  is  Abraham's  God,  and 
not  a  God  of  the  dead  but  of  the  living,  He  must  have 
in  reserve  for  His  friend  a  return  to  life,  certainly  not 
less  rich  and  full  than  the  life  of  earth,  and  therefore 
clothed  in  a  fitting  body. 

The  nature  of  the  resurrection  body  is  to  be 
learned  from  the  descriptions  given  us  of  our  Lord's 
own  Body  after  the  resurrection;  and  by  S.  Paul's 
deductions  from  the  same.  It  was  by  rising  from  the 
dead  Himself  that  Christ  "  lighted  up  life  and  incor- 
ruption"  (2  Tim.  i.  10).  There  are  tw^o  cautions 
which  must  reverently  be  borne  in  mind,  however, 
in  applying  to  ourselves  what  was  seen  in  Him. 


3  go      A^ature  of  Christ's  Risen  Body. 

First,  His  Body  was  the  Body  o£  the  Incarnate 
Word ;  and  as  He  was  able  to  do  with  it,  even  before 
death,  what  other  men  cannot  do,  so  it  may  have 
been  afterwards.  And  on  the  other  hand.  His  Body, 
during  the  forty  days,  was  not  seen  in  the  final  state  of 
glorification,  but  only  in  the  initial  stage  of  its  return 
from  death.  Yet  with  this  twofold  reserve  we  may 
find  an  abundance  of  instruction  to  gather  concerning 
our  own  future.  His  Body  was  seen,  and  felt,  to  be 
a  real  body, — He  does  not  say  of  "  flesh  and  blood," — 
but  of  flesh  and  bones  "  (S.  Luke  xxiv.  39).  It  was 
still  in  such  relations  with  this  material  universe, 
that  His  disciples  "ate  and  drank  with  Him  after 
that  He  rose  from  the  dead (Acts  x.  41).  It  was 
undoubtedly  the  same  Body  with  which  He  had  been 
born  and  had  lived  and  died,  not  a  different  one.  In 
token  of  this.  He  shewed  them  His  hands.  His  feet, 
and  His  side,  where  there  were  still  traces  of  the 
death  which  He  had  suffered  (S.  Luke  xxiv.  89  ;  S. 
John  XX.  20).  Upon  this  identity  of  His  resurrection 
Body  with  His  natural  Body,  He  even  bases  the  proof 
of  His  own  personal  identity, — "  that  it  is  I  Myself," 
— as  if  He  could  not  have  been  Himself,  had  He 
appeared  in  another  body.  And  yet  the  changes 
which  have  taken  place  in  it  are  no  less  remarkable 
than  the  signs  of  continuity.  It  is  not  always  and 
at  once  to  be  recognised,  even  by  those  who  are 
familiar  with  Him,  cither  by  look,  or  by  tones  of  voice. 
Some  sort  of  spiritual  preparation  is  required  in  order 
to  be  on  a  perfect  understanding  with  it.  Once  we 
even  read  of  His  appearing  "  in  a  different  form " 


^Parable  of  Seed  and  Plant,  391 

(S.  Mark  xvi.  12).  Even  on  an  occasion  when  they 
were  expecting  Him,  and  had  been  appointed  to  meet 
Him,  "  some  were  in  two  minds  "  when  He  appeared, 
not  knowing  what  to  make  of  it  (S.  Matt,  xxviii.  17). 
I£  still  able  to  draw  breath  from  the  air,  and  to  eat 
the  food  which  was  given,  and  to  walk  upon  the 
ground,  Christ's  resurrection  Body  was  not  tied  to 
these  things.  In  a  chamber  where  no  door  is  opened. 
He  suddenly  starts  into  view  (S.  John  xx.  26).  He 
no  less  suddenly  "  vanishes  out  of  sight "  (S.  Luke 
xxiv.  31)  when  it  pleases  Him.  His  Body  is  able 
at  will  to  move  upwards  through  the  air  (Acts  i.  9). 

Such  are  some  of  the  indications  which  Christ 
vouchsafed  to  give  us  of  the  relations  of  the  resurrec- 
tion body  to  this  in  which  we  now  are.  S.  Paul 
carries  our  knowledge  a  little  further,  by  a  parable 
and  by  a  generalisation.  He  likens  the  dilference 
between  the  present  earthly  body  and  that  which 
will  develope  from  it  to  the  difference  between  the 
naked  grain  which  is  sown  and  the  plant  which 
springs  out  of  it.  The  seed  appears  to  be  hopelessly 
disintegrated;  but  it  pleases  God  to  re-embody  the 
life  which  in  germ  existed  in  it,  and  that,  after  no 
capricious  fashion.  An  invariable  law  connects  the 
seed  sown  with  the  springing  plant,  and,  although 
science  may  be  unable  to  inform  us  why,  the  grain 
of  wheat  produces  wheat  and  the  grain  of  barley, 
barley.  So  the  body  which  a  man  will  wear  here- 
after will  be  "  his  own  body  "  (1  Cor.  xv.  38), — by  no 
means  on  account  of  an  identity  of  component  par- 
ticles, or  of  similar  configuration,  but  because  it  is 


392       Spirituality  of  the  Risen  Body. 


the  only  one  which  could  issue  out  of  that  aggregate 
of  faculties  and  relations  called  now  his  body,  so 
employed  as  he  has  employed  it.  But  the  organism 
which  is  to  clothe  the  man  at  the  resurrection  differs 
far  more  from  the  present  body  than  the  plant  from 
the  seed.  Not  only  is  it  more  beautiful,  and  stronger 
"  in  glory  "  and  "  in  power  ; " — "  it  is  sown  in  corrup- 
tion, it  is  raised  in  incorruptibility."  There  is  no  fear 
lest  it  should  again  droop  and  decay  and  die.  The 
man  has  at  length  reached  true  immortality.  For,  to 
sum  up  the  whole  contrast  in  a  word,  the  body  which 
was  "sown  a  natural  body,  is  raised  a  spiritual 
body  "  (1  Cor.  xv.  44).  That  is  the  great  distinction. 
Whereas  on  earth  the  man  was  "  in  the  flesh,"  and  in 
Paradise  "in  the  spirit,"  he  now  finds  the  perfect 
union  between  the  two,  when  the  spirit  which  has 
learned  all  that  the  world  of  pure  spirit  has  to  teach 
it  comes  again  into  a  body  which  never  limits  or 
thwarts  it,  but  which  absolutely  fulfils  all  its  behests 
without  difficulty.  Those  who  are  still  alive  at  our 
Lord's  coming  will  experience  the  same  change  with- 
out passing  through  death. 

Althouoch  "all  men  shall  rise  ao^ain  with  their 
bodies,"  yet  such  a  resurrection  as  this  is  only  given 
to  the  faithful.  It  is  the  special  privilege  of  those 
who  have  learned  to  make  our  Lord's  flesh  their 
meat  (S.  John  vi.  54).  This  is  that  "  resurrection 
from  the  dead"  (e^avaorao-fc  v^KpwVy  Phil.  iii.  11) 
which  saints  long  and  labour  to  attain.  In  contra- 
distinction to  them,  the  wicked,  though  they  return 
likewise  from  the  merely  spiritual  state,  still  remain 


Resurrection  not  alike  for  all,  393 


among  the   dead.^     Such  bodies   as   they  receive 

correspond  to  their  moral  and  spiritual  condition, 

and  therefore  contribute  nothing  to  their  freedom 

or  fulness  of  life,  but  on  the  contrary,  bear  witness 

to  their  inward  disorganization  and  decay.    If  we 

could  adopt  what  appears  to  be  the  most  direct  gram- 

matical  translation  of  one  hard  text,  it  would  seem 

to  suggest  that  some  men,  too  far  gone  in  natural 

corruption  to  be  capable  of  the  full  ''resurrection 

of  life,"  yet  not  so  wilfully  wicked  as  to  deserve  "  the 

resurrection  of  damnation "  (S.  John  v.  29),  would 

be  permitted  to  continue  a  disembodied  existence, 

apart  from  other  men,  but  not'  apart  from  God  (1  Pet. 

iv.  6).    Possibly  something  of  a  like  nature  underlies 

our  Lord's  saying  about  those  who  should  "enter 

into  life  maimed,  or  halt,  or  having  one  eye"  (S. 

Mark  ix.  43-47).    Something  of  the  man's  history 

must  be  visible  in  his  very  appearance. 

^  The  popular  notion  that  there  will  be  separate  resurrections  of 
the  faithful  and  the  wicked,  at  distant  times,  is  founded  on  a  miscon- 
ception of  the  figurative  language  of  the  Apocalypse.  "The  first 
resurrection"  (Rev.  xx.  5)  appears  to  indicate  that  rising  to  new 
power,  by  which  the  saints  influence  the  Church  after  their  death. 
It  has  been  treated  of  in  this  work  on  p.  234,  The  study  of  the 
lives  and  teaching  of  the  saints  by  after  generations  gives  them  a 
share  with  Christ  in  His  supreme  rule  over  the  world  now.  Another 
and  more  usual  interpretation  is  that  the  ''first  resurrection"  is  the 
awakening  to  newness  of  life  which  is  given  to  the  faithful  through 
their  Baptism  (comp.  1  Pet.  i.  3).  But  whatever  else  it  may  mean, 
the  character  of  the  Apocalypse  forbids  a  literal  acceptance  of  the 
words.  AVhen  S.  Paul  says  (1  Thess.  iv,  16),  ''The  dead  in  Christ 
shall  rise  first,"  it  is  clear  from  the  original  at  a  glance  that  he  does 
not  contrast  them  with  other  dead  who  shall  rise  after,  but  with  the 
quick  who  are  to  be  transformed  :  "  Then  we  which  are  alive  and 
remain."  S.  Paul  is  just  reversing  the  opinion  w^hicli  had  gained 
ground  at  Thessalonica  that  "  we  which  are  alive  and  remain  .  ,  , 
should  inevent  them  which  are  asleep." 


394  Christ's  Second  Coming. 


%  4. 

The  general  resurrection  takes  place  at  the  Last 
Day.  It  accompanies  the  coming  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ.  Indeed,  it  may  almost  be  said  to  he  His 
coming ;  for  as  we  have  pointed  out  elsewhere,  the 
Second  Advent  of  Christ  does  not  mean  that  He 
returns  to  our  level,  but  that  we  are  caught  away 
to  His.  Instead  of  subjecting  Himself  again  to  our 
earthly  senses,  He  gives,  "  in  a  moment,  in  the 
twinkling  of  an  eye,''  to  quick  and  dead  alike,  those 
new  faculties  of  the  resurrection  body  by  which  to 
apprehend  His  Presence, — that  Presence  which  ever 
since  His  Ascension  has  been  among  us,  but  perceived 
only  by  faith. 

That  such  a  Coming  awaits  the  world  is  one  of  the 
clearest  revelations  of  the  Gospel.  Recently,  men 
have  been  drawn  with  much  profit  to  consider, 
more  definitely  than  before,  some  less  extraordinary 
facts  and  events  in  the  Church's  life  as  Comings  of 
our  Lord.  He  comes  in  the  Sacraments,  and  in  His 
Word.  He  comes  to  the  soul  at  death.  He  comes  to 
the  Church  in  those  great  moments,  like  the  Fall  of 
Jerusalem,  the  Conversion  of  Constantine,  the  Refor- 
mation, which  we  rightly  call  crises  or  acts  of  decision 
and  judgment.  But  these  all  are  but  tentative  and 
preliminary  Comings.  They  form  points  of  transition 
from  one  scene  in  the  long  tragedy  to  another.  But 
we  still  wait  for  a  great  denouement ^  which  will  give 
an  appropriate  and  artistic  close  to  it  all,  gathering 


Uncertainty  of  its  Date. 


395 


up  in  one  final  catastrophe  all  that  the  minor  Advents 
have  prefigured. 

The  date  at  which  the  great  Advent  will  take  place 
is  entirely  unknown  to  us.  It  cannot  be  calculated 
from  the  symbolical  numbers  of  S.  John ;  nor  can  the 
most  spiritual  discernment  be  sure  of  reading  un- 
erringly the  signs  of  its  approach.  If,  in  reaction 
from  the  profane  curiosity  which  delights  to  make  out 
the  day  and  hour,  we  hold  that  it  is  still  far  distant, 
our  very  thinking  so  is  more  of  a  sign  that  it  is  at 
hand  than  otherwise ;  for  the  one  thing  certain  about 
the  date  is  that  it  will  throw  out  all  computations, 
"  for  in  such  an  hour  as  ye  think  not,  the  Son  of  Man 
Cometh''  (S.  Matt.  xxiv.  44),  Assuredly  Christ  will 
not  come  till  the  very  moment  of  the  "  fulness  of  the 
times,"  any  more  than  at  His  first  coming.  But  if 
the  world  does  not  yet  appear  ripe  for  the  end,  no  one 
can  calculate  how  long  or  short  a  time  might  be 
needed  for  the  ripening.  One  day  is  with  the  Lord 
as  a  thousand  years ''  (2  Pet.  iii.  8) ;  and  events 
might  move  with  an  appalling  rush  if  it  pleased  Him 
to  give  the  impulse.  The  ingredients  are  all  in  the 
cup;  it  only  needs  the  addition  of  some  drop  to 
resolve  and  precipitate  them.  There  is  but  one 
lesson  which  our  Lord  inculcates  on  every  mention  of 
His  Coming, — to  be  always  watching  for  it,  and  never 
to  acquiesce  in  the  belief  that  it  is  far  away. 

It  is  dangerous  to  fix  too  closely  the  meaning  of 
those  warnings  which  were  given  by  Christ  upon  the 
Mount  of  Olives,  and  afterwards  developed  by  S.  John 
in  PatmoSj  but  the  preparation  for  the  Advent  ap- 


396       Preparation  for  it  in  Nature. 


pears  to  lie  in  two  main  directions,  natural  and 
historical.  The  resurrection  of  the  dead,  and  the 
transformation  of  the  still  living,  will  not  take  place 
on  an  unchanged  theatre.  There  is  too  close  a  con- 
nexion between  man  and  the  world  for  that.  Christ 
speaks  of  "  signs  in  the  sun  and  in  the  moon  and  in 
the  stars"  (S.  Luke  xxi.  25),  and  S.  Peter  of  "fire" 
and  "fervent  heat,"  which  will  dissolve  this  present 
fabric  (2  Pet.  iii,  7,  10,  12),  and  prepare  the  way  for 
a  new.  Whatever  may  be  the  form  of  those  last  con- 
vulsions of  the  visible  order,  both  revelation  and 
science  lead  us  to  believe  that  as  this  world  had  a 
beginning,  so  it  must  have  an  end.  The  end,  however, 
is  a  new  and  more  glorious  beginning  again.  Creation, 
which  has,  by  no  fault  of  its  own,  shared  in  the 
degradation  and  misery  of  man,  shares  also  in  the 
benefits  wrought  out  by  Jesus  Christ.  When  "the 
redemption  of  our  body  "  comes,  then  "  creation  also 
shall  be  emancipated  from  the  slavery  of  decay  into 
the  freedom  of  the  glory  of  the  children  of  God " 
(Rom.  viii.  20-23).  The  travail  in  which  it  now 
groans  shall  not  be  an  unfruitful  travail.  It  issues 
in  that  "regeneration"  which  was  stated  and  left 
without  explanation  by  our  Lord  (S.  Matt.  xix.  28). 

And  as  Nature,  through  the  sins  of  men  on  one 
hand,  and  their  diligence  and  science  on  the  other,  as 
well  as  by  processes  of  her  own,  is  working  up  towards 
the  Advent  of  her  Redeemer  and  ours,  so  also  is  the 
liistory  of  man.  By  the  spread  of  the  Gospel  among 
all  nations  (S.  Matt,  xxi  v.  14),  and  by  the  subsequent 
reassumption  of  Israel  (Rom.  xi,  15),  the  way  of 


Preparatio7i  for  it  in  History,  397 


Christ's  Coming  is  prepared.  The  Catholic  Church 
refuses  to  enter  into  any  vain  speculations  about  a 
Millennium  in  which  Christ  is  literally  and  visibly  to 
reign  upon  earth  among  Saints  already  risen  from  the 
dead ;  but  she  has  reason  to  expect  that  before  the 
world  is  hurried  to  the  final  Judgment,  wider  triumphs 
will  be  allowed  to  her  than  she  has  yet  seen.  Great 
Oriental  nations,  as  well  as  the  simpler  races  of  the 
islands  and  of  Africa  and  America,  have  still  to  con- 
tribute to  the  fulness  of  her  Catholicity^  Her  broken 
unity  must  be  restored.  And  then  she  expects  to 
have  one  last  terrible  combat  with  all  the  concentrated 
force  which  Satan  can  levy  in  the  world,  when  good 
and  evil  will  endeavour  to  disentangle  themselves 
from  each  other  and  gain  possession  of  the  earth. 
Then,  when  the  mysterious  Rebel, — the  Antichrist 
who,  it  may  be,  pretends  to  be  the  Christ, — shall  have 
gathered  head,  and  exhibited  the  utmost  of  his  impious 
power,  unrestrained,  the  Lord  Jesus  will  be  revealed, 
and  "  bring  him  to  nought  by  the  manifestation  of  His 
Presence  "  (2  Thess.  ii.  8). 

§  5. 

Impressive  pictures  of  the  Final  Judgment  are 
drawn  for  us  in  the  Bible ;  and  we  can  only  con- 
ceive of  it  in  a  symbolical,  apocalyptic  form.  Never- 
theless it  is  as  well  to  recognise  that  those  pictures 
are  not  to  be  interpreted  literally,  and  to  endeavour 
to  disengage  some  of  the  chief  ideas  which  they 
represent. 

The  first  element  in  a  judgment  is  that  of  deciding 


398    The  Jtidgment  an  Exposure  of  Truth. 


what  has  been  in  dispute.  It  is  a  clearing  up  o£  con- 
fused and  uncertain  questions.  The  matter  of  debate 
is  examined,  the  witnesses  heard  and  tested,  a  lumi- 
nous review  of  the  cause  is  given,  and  an  authori- 
tative conclusion  drawn.  But,  although  the  principle 
is  the  same,  there  is  no  need  to  transfer  to  the  Last 
Day  every  detail  of  human  courts.  No  evidence  wil} 
be  called  for,  and  there  will  be  no  pleading  and 
counterpleading.  In  the  light  of  Christ's  appearing, 
all  human  history,  in  its  most  secret  and  intricate 
windings,  will  be  made  visible  at  a  glance.  It  will  be 
unnecessary  to  call  attention  to  this  or  that  fact,  to 
point  out  circumstances  here  and  there,  to  discuss 
and  argue.  Our  Lord  tells  us  that  His  Coming  will 
be  like  a  flash  of  lightning.  When  the  lightning 
bursts  out  upon  the  night,  it  does  not  move  slowly 
along  from  feature  to  feature  of  the  landscape,  but 
reveals  the  whole,  from  end  to  end,  and  from  side  to 
side,  at  once.  So  it  will  be  in  the  Judgment  Day 
(S.  Luke  xvii.  24).  The  motives  which  lay  behind 
words  and  actions  will  be  as  plain  as  the  words  and 
actions  themselves.  What  private  and  humble  per- 
sonages contributed  to  the  development  of  the  world 
and  the  Church  will  be  seen  in  its  true  relation  to  the 
brilliant  achievements  of  great  statesmen,  or  generals, 
or  ecclesiastics.  It  is  sometimes  asked  by  trembling 
souls  whether  repented  and  forgiven  sins  will  be 
brought  into  the  judgment.  No  other  answer  can  be 
given  but  that  saying  of  Christ,  that There  is  nothing 
covered  up  that  shall  not  be  revealed ;  and  hid,  that 
shall  not  be  known (S.  Luke  xii.  2) ;  and  that  of  S. 


The  judgment  severs  Good  f^^om  EviL  399 


Paul,  Make  no  judgment  before  the  time,  until  the 
Lord  come,  who  will  both  throw  light  upon  the  hidden 
things  o£  darkness,  and  manifest  the  counsels  of  the 
hearts (1  Cor.  iv.  5).  Everything  must  come  out, 
good  and  bad.  But  penitent  souls  will  then  rejoice 
that  it  is  so.  The  revelation  will  do  them  no  harm, 
nor  cause  them  any  uncertainty  or  fear.  The  sins 
disclosed  are  no  longer  ilieir  sins,  and  so  far  as  they 
are  concerned  God  has  forgotten  the  sins.  That 
moment  will  put  the  finishing  touch  to  their  own 
penitence,  and  along  with  the  revelation  of  their 
former  shame  will  come  the  revelation  of  the  glory 
of  Christ's  love  which  it  has  been  made  to  subserve 
and  of  the  grace  which  has  been  able  to  turn  it  to 
account.  Confessed  and  forsaken  sin  will  be  the  most 
powerful  evidence  against  the  Accuser,  who  will  find 
nothing  to  lay  to  the  charge  of  God's  elect "  (Rom. 
viii.  33). 

Such  a  judgment,  however,  is  more  than  a  con- 
vincing exposure  of  the  truth.  It  does  not  leave 
things  where  it  found  them.  It  shapes  itself  into  an 
effective  sentence.  There  is  no  more  return,  after 
that,  to  the  state  of  mixture  in  which  we  now  live. 
The  "  eternal  judgment "  (Heb.  vi.  2)  not  only  gives  a 
speculative  satisfaction  regarding  the  past,  but  it  is 
the  dawn  of  a  new  day  altogether,  in  which  good  and 
evil  enter  no  more  into  conflict,  but  are  finally 
separated  from  each  other. 

Against  the  decision  then  made  there  will  be  no 
appeal, — not  simply  because  there  is  no  higher  autho- 
rity to  appeal  to,  but  because  the  truth  will  be  so 


400 


l^he  Jttdge  a  Htmaii  Jiidge. 


sel£-evidently  shewn  that  none  can  dispute  it.  Those 
who  are  condemned  will  condemn  themselves,  and 
those  who  are  justified  will  see  the  grounds  o£  their 
justification.  For  the  Judge  is  not  only  one  who 
knows  all  things  in  their  bearings  with  a  Divine 
omniscience,  and  weighs  them  in  the  scales  o£  a 
Divine  righteousness: — the  same  perfect,  representa- 
tive, once-tempted  human  nature  which  qualified  Him 
to  be  "  a  merciful  High-priest  and  a  faithful "  (Heb. 
ii.  17),  qualifies  Him  also  to  be  a  faithful  and  a  merciful 
Judge.  There  could  indeed  be  no  difference,  either  in 
strictness  or  in  tenderness,  between  the  Father's  judg- 
ment and  that  of  Jesus  Christ.  Nevertheless,  it  is  to 
Him,  as  the  responsible  Head  of  the  human  race,  that 
all  decision  affecting  the  human  race  is  assigned. 

The  Father  judgeth  none,  but  hath  given  the  entire 
judgment  to  the  Son,  .  .  .  because  He  is  Son  of  Man 
(S.  John  V.  22,  27). 

§6. 

When  even  S.  John  the  Divine  acknowledged  that 
he  was  unable  to  guess  what  the  children  of  God 
would  develope  into  (1  John  iii.  2),  it  would  be  worse 
than  idle  to  dogmatize  upon  the  future  state  of  the 
blessed.  The  glory  of  it  infinitely  transcends  all 
power  of  imagination,  even  when  quickened  by 
a  life-long  experience  of  the  Divine  goodness  to- 
wards the  saints  on  earth.  To  those  who  have  felt 
wliat  it  is  to  be  under  the  guilt  and  power  of 
sin,  it  is  enough  to  fill  the  heart  with  *'joy  un- 
speakable and  full  of  glory "  even  to  contemplate 


Salvation. 


401 


that  one  aspect  of  it  which  is  suggested  by  the  word 
salvation  (1  Pet.  i.  9).  Salvation  is  a  word  which 
draws  its  splendour  from  a  contrast.  It  makes  us 
think  of  the  danger  we  were  in, — of  the  certain  per- 
dition which  awaited  us,  if  it  had  not  been  for  our 
Saviour.  The  whole  life  of  grace,  indeed,  is  a  life 
of  gradually  realised  salvation,  and  throughout  our 
pilgrimage  we  keep  (in  S.  Peter  s  language),  receiv- 
ing it ;  but  it  is  only  when  the  last  trial  has  been 
surmounted,  and  the  eternal  judgment  pronounced, 
that  the  soul  can  be  thought  of  as  fully  saved.  Then, 
looking  back  upon  the  sins  of  life  as  purged,  and 
its  labours  all  without  damage  accomplished,  the 
white-robed  and  palm-bearing  company  will  acknow- 
ledge the  completeness  of  what  they  possess,  and  to 
whom  they  owe  it :  Salvation  unto  our  God  that 
sitteth  upon  the  throne,  and  unto  the  Lamb "  (Rev* 
vii.  10).  There  is  nothing  ignoble  in  the  seeking  of 
salvation  ;  and  men  who  blame  Christians  for  it,  as 
if  they  were  pursuing  a  sordid  and  selfish  object, 
can  have  entered  but  little  into  the  wholesome  fears 
which  the  teaching  of  Christ  inspires.  An  instinct 
of  self-preservation  lies  in  the  very  springs  of  life, 
and  must  shew  itself  in  spiritual  and  eternal  concerns 
as  much  as  in  earthly.  Our  Lord  and  His  Apostles 
constantly  appeal  to  it.  It  only  becomes  unworthy, 
when  men  seek  the  salvation  of  their  souls  by 
methods  which  will  never  lead  to  it,  namely  by 
neglect  of  duties  and  by  uncharitable  isolation.  Yet, 
in  spite  of  its  all-important  greatness,  salvation  de- 
scribes only  the  negative  side  of  that  which  Christ 

2  D 


402 


Perfection. 


has  procured  for  His  people.  The  future  glory  is 
a  positive  thing.  Salvation  is  our  rescue  from  the 
consequences  of  the  Fall.  Glory  is  the  destiny  for 
which  God  created  men  in  Christ  without  reference 
to  the  Fall. 

i  Without  attempting  anything  like  an  account  of 
the  heavenly  glory  of  the  children  of  God,  it  will 
be  safe  to  say  that  it  must  include  a  fourfold  per- 
fection. Those  who  attain  it  will  be  perfect  in 
themselves,  and  in  perfect  relation  with  God,  with 
the  world  in  which  they  are,  and  with  their 
brethren. 

\  To  be  perfect  in  themselves,  is  to  have  true 
freedom,  so  that  they  may  follow  out  to  the  full 
what  is  natural  to  them.  Their  constitution  itself 
will  no  longer  impose  an  irksome  restriction.  They 
could  not  be  happy  without  some  medium  through 
which  to  act  and  to  be  acted  upon ;  nor  with  a 
medium  inadequate  to  their  wishes.  But  the  spiritual 
body  will  give  them  all  that  they  require.  No  conflict 
will  arise,  as  now,  between  flesh  and  spirit.  There 
will  be  no  inertness,  or  weariness,  or  weakness,  or 
pain,  or  disease,  or  anything  connected  with  decay. 
Nor  will  there  be  any  need  of  vigilance  against  corrupt 
desires;  for  the  body  being  absolutely  under  the 
control  of  the  will,  and  the  will  itself  being  perfectly 
guided  by  the  conscience,  and  the  conscience  irradi- 
ated by  the  direct  light  of  love,  all  power  of  tempta- 
tion will  be  at  an  end.  The  whole  man  will  move 
together  in  all  that  he  does,  with  an  inward  unity 
like  the  unity  of  God.    Faculties  beyond  anything 


The  Beatific  Vision, 


403 


which  can  now  be  guessed  at,  will  be  wielded  with- 
out effort  by  a  central  authority,  itself  sure  and 
sound,  with  the  confident  health  of  a  holiness  which 
nothing  can  seduce. 

Such  perfect  soundness  of  the  redeemed  soul 
within  itself  will  be  at  once  the  condition  and  the 
result  of  a  perfect  relation  to  God.  "  Without  sancti- 
fication  no  man  shall  see  the  Lord  "  (Heb.  xii.  14)  ; 
and  yet  he  cannot  attain  the  sanctification  except 
by  seeing  Him.  ''We  know  that  if  He  appear,  we 
shall  be  like  Him,  for  we  shall  see  Him  as  He  is'' 
(1  John  iii.  2).  The  Beatific  Vision  of  God  in 
Christ  will  have  the  power  to  transform  those  who 
are  admitted  to  it,  in  proportion  to  their  power  of 
taking  it  in.  As  it  will  be  perpetually  before  their 
eyes,  and  they  will  never  for  an  instant  lose  sight 
of  it  again,  their  power  of  taking  it  in  will  be  per- 
petually increased;  and  they,  in  consequence,  will 
still,  in  heaven,  be  more  and  more  "  transformed  into 
the  same  image  from  glory  to  glory"  (2  Cor.  iii.  18). 
All  will  not  be  accomplished  at  the  first  glance.  It 
is  only  true  up  to  a  certain  point  to  say  that  the 
day  of  faith  and  hope  will  be  over,  because  they 
are  swallowed  up  in  sight  (2  Cor.  v.  7 ;  Rom.  viii.  24). 
Faith  and  hope,  like  charity,  are  among  the  things 
which  will  "abide,"  even  when  the  saints  know  as 
they  were  known  (1  Cor.  xiii.  12,  13),  because  there 
will  always  remain  an  infinity  of  blessed  experience 
to  be  drawn  from  that  inexhaustible  fountain  of  good- 
ness ;  and  as  age  passes  after  age,  it  will  seem 
to  the  redeemed  as  if  they  were  only  just  beginning 


404    The  New  Heavens  and  New  Earth. 


to  appreciate  the  glory  of  God,  and  only  just  begin- 
ning to  be  capable  of  appreciating  it.  The  eternal 
life  of  the  saints  consists  in  the  knowledge  of  God, 
in  heaven  as  on  earth,  and  there  is  no  limit  that 
we  are  aware  of,  at  which  that  eternal  life  will  cease 
to  expand  and  increase  in  strength. 

Perfect  in  themselves,  and  in  perfect  relation  to 
God,  they  will  live  in  perfect  surroundings.  Those 
"  new  heavens  and  new  earth,  wherein  dwelleth  right- 
eousness" (2  Pet.  iii.  13),  will  give  them  a  never- 
ending  field  for  enjoyment,  and  wonder,  and  thanks- 
giving. Heaven  is  not  a  place,  it  is  true;  but  it 
expresses  a  whole  world  of  things  with  which  the 
blessed  will  be  connected.  The  delight  which  God 
here  accords  to  the  senses  will  be  found  there  in  its 
glorified  and  spiritual  counterpart.  Far  as  the  Chris- 
tian imagination  of  heaven  is  removed  from  anything 
sensuous,  we  are  not  required  to  represent  it  to  our 
minds  as  so  severely  spiritual,  so  unmixedly  a  king- 
dom of  ideas,  that  the  simple  and  unintellectual  and 
childlike  would  find  no  attraction  in  thinking  of  it. 
There  will  be  transformed  objects  to  correspond  with 
the  transformed  body ;  and  the  relation  to  them  will 
be  a  perfect  relation, — of  mastery,  not  subjection, — of 
free  and  restful  delight,  not  of  bewildered  snatching 
here  and  there.  And,  unless  we  wrongly  interpret 
some  passages  of  the  New  Testament,  our  relation  to 
the  glorified  world  will  not  be  one  of  ethical  freedom 
only,  but  of  direct  control  and  government.  We  are 
destined  to  take  that  place  with  regard  to  nature 
which  is  now  occupied  by  the  angels.  Ourselves 


Perfect  Union  of  the  Blessed.  405 

made  "  equal  unto  angels  "  (S.  Luke  xx.  36)  in  those 
respects  in  which  now  we  fall  short  of  them, — in 
spirituality,  in  concentration,  in  reach  of  understand- 
ing, in  orderliness,  in  holiness,  in  devotion, — we  shall 
be  able  perfectly  to  fulfil  those  functions  which  were 
contained  in  the  charge  given  to  man  at  his  beginning 
(Gen.  i.  28).  It  may  even  be  that  those  faculties 
which  now  are  employed  in  artistic  interpretation  and 
imaginative  invention  may  become  a  power  of  actual 
creation,  and  that  new  realms  may  be  framed  through 
the  children  of  God  to  the  glory  of  their  Father. 

The  mutual  relations  between  those  who  are  saved 
will  be  no  less  perfect  than  their  relations  to  reno- 
vated nature.  Perfected  union  of  all  men  in  Christ 
is  a  main  part  of  the  glory  to  which  we  look  forward. 
But  little  is  told  us  of  special  joys  for  individual  souls 
in  heaven ;  the  teaching  of  Scripture  is  mainly  occu- 
pied with  what  is  common  to  all.  It  would,  indeed, 
be  most  false  to  suggest  that  the  several  personalities 
of  men  will  cease  to  exist,  and  that  nothing  will 
remain  but  a  general  consciousness  of  tlie  race, — 
whatever  that  might  be.  S.  Peter  will  for  ever  be 
S.  Peter,  and  S.  Paul,  S.  Paul,  each  with  his  own 
continuous  experience,  which  none  can  share  with 
him  at  first  hand.  This  is  contained  in  the  promise 
of  the  "  white  stone,  and  upon  the  stone  a  new  name 
written  which  no  man  knoweth  but  he  that  receiveth 
it"  (Rev.  ii.  17).  But  the  joyful  experience  of  each 
soul  will  pass  on  into  the  joy  of  all.  Even  here, 
Christians  are  sufiiciently  knit  into  one  body  to  be 
affected  by  one  another's  suflferings  and  delights.  But 


4o6    Differences  of  Character  in  Heaven. 


the  sympathy  which  is  here  a  matter  o£  deHberate 
and  difficult  attainment,  and  most  imperfectly  real- 
ised even  among  those  who  stand  nearest  to  each 
other,  will  then  be  instinctive  and  universal.  Whereas 
now  the  union  of  Christ's  members  is  a  matter  of 
faith  and  hope,  it  will  then  be  a  matter  of  realised 
consciousness  and  of  sight.  Love  will  go  out  from 
soul  to  soul  in  the  same  strong  and  satisfying  manner 
in  which  it  moves  in  the  Blessed  Trinity  itself.  All 
those  peculiarities  which  in  this  life  repel  and  hinder 
confidence  will  be  done  away.  Hearts  will  be  all 
open  to  each  other.  No  false  reserve  will  any  longer 
conceal  the  motive  which  prompts  every  thought  and 
action :  "  His  name  shall  be  upon  their  foreheads " 
(Rev.  xxii.  4). 

If  personality  is  preserved  in  heaven,  it  is  evident 
at  once  that  there  will  be  no  dead  level  of  blessedness 
among  the  redeemed,  but  that  inequalities  will  still 
remain.  In  the  Gospel  parable,  each  labourer  receives 
the  same  reward,  because  all  receive  the  salvation  of 
their  souls,  and  all  are  blessed  up  to  their  full  capacity 
of  blessedness.  But  the  souls  thus  saved  are  still 
widely  different  from  each  other, — not  in  sinlessness, 
for  all  will  be  sinless, — but  in  depth  of  character,  in 
powers,  in  versatility,  in  receptiveness.  All  are  glori- 
fied, and  each  one  will  rejoice  in  his  own  particular 
glory  without  envying  another's,  but  the  glory  of 
all  cannot  be  alike  (1  Cor.  xv.  41).  There  is,  for 
example,  the  glory  of  the  innocence  which  was  never 
lost,  remaining  eternally  distinct  from  the  glory  of 
the  cleansed  penitent  (Rev.  xiv.  3,  4).    And  as  with 


Permanence  of  Relationships.  407 


moral  characteristics,  so  also  with  the  intellectual. 
There  will  be  the  glory  o£  the  simple-minded,  and  the 
glory  of  the  scientific.  Mere  acquirements,  indeed, 
will  go  for  very  little,  and  many  that  have  been  first 
in  this  life  will  be  last  there,  and  the  last  first, — if 
they  were  last  only  for  lack  of  opportunity;  but 
natural  bent,  and  diligent  self -culture,  must  assuredly 
receive  their  appropriate  consecration  and  perfection. 
In  like  manner — although  all  that  is  physical  and 
earthly  in  such  distinctions  passes  away — distinctions 
like  those  of  sex,  and  nationality,  which  enter  into 
the  very  essence  of  souls,  cannot  be  utterly  obliterated. 
And  ties  which  have  bound  souls  closely  together  in 
this  life,  like  those  of  husband  and  wife,  mother  and 
son,  friend  and  friend,  will  retain,  in  the  altered 
circumstances,  all  that  was  inward  and  of  eternal 
value,  and  will  be  glorified  with  the  glory  of  the  souls 
which  they  connect.  Even  on  earth,  such  relation- 
ships are  not  stationary,  but  change  their  outward 
features  from  year  to  year,  and  Mary  s  attitude 
towards  Jesus,  and  His  to  her,  was  not  the  same  on 
Calvary  as  it  had  been  at  Nazareth;  still  less  is  it 
the  same  now ;  but  every  instinct  of  the  heart  rebels 
against  supposing  that  Mary  in  heaven  will  be  no 
more  to  Jesus  than  any  other  holy  woman,  and  that 
she  will  remember  her  motherhood  as  only  a  strange 
dream  of  the  past. 

Perfect  mutual  relations  among  souls  so  widely 
different  necessitate  the  ideas  of  authority  and  sub- 
ordination. Such  ideas  are  commended  to  our  minds 
when  the  glorified  Church  is  represented  to  us,  not  as 


4o8     Degrees  of  Attthority  in  Heave^t. 


a  Garden  o£  Eden,  with  its  lonely  scenery,  but  as  a 
City,  a  ^'new  Jerusalem"  (Rev.  xxi.  2).  Our  Lord, 
in  figurative  language,  said  that  His  Apostles  should 
judge, — that  is,  should  rule, — the  twelve  tribes of 
His  new  Israel  (S.  Matt.  xix.  28).  He  spoke  of  some 
being  set  to  govern  ten  cities,  and  others  five  (S.  Luke 
xix.  17,  19),  in  proportion  to  the  faithfulness  with 
which  they  had  acquitted  themselves  in  a  simple 
office  of  trust  on  earth.  Thus  good  work  is  rewarded 
by  further  opportunities  of  good  work.  It  is  alto- 
gether beyond  us  to  guess  in  what  kind  of  way  such 
ruling  spirits  will  be  able  to  benefit  those  who  are  put 
under  them,  in  a  state  where  all  are  blessed  beyond 
fear  of  failure ;  but  in  whatever  way  it  may  be,  it  is 
at  least  certain  that  the  rule  will  be  like  that  of 
Christ  Himself, — one  of  loving  watchfulness,  of  meek 
and  unselfasserting  serviceableness  (S.  Luke  xxii.  25, 
26), — one  in  which  priesthood  is  not  forgotten  in  the 
organizing  work  of  kingship  (Rev.  i.  6), 

§  7. 

And  here,  perhaps,  may  come  in  what  was  observed 
concerning  those  who  in  this  life  were  not  among  the 
elect,  and  yet  cannot  be  classed  among  the  reprobate. 
There  is  a  special  sense  in  which  salvation  belongs 
only  to  the  Church,  but  the  Apostle's  language  sug- 
gests that  in  a  different  sense  it  may  belong  to 
others  also  (1  Tim.  iv.  10).  Christians  are  regarded  by 
S.  James  as  "  a  kind  of  firstfruits  of  God's  creatures  " 
(S.  James  i.  18).  It  follows  that  there  must  be  a 
harvest  of  some  kind  to  come  afterwards.    How  ex- 


ytidgment  of  those  outside.  409 


tensive  that  harvest  may  ultimately  be  we  are  not 
told;  but  there  is  no  difficulty  in  supposing  that  it 
includes  all  those  who,  in  the  midst  of  false  beliefs 
and  heathen  superstitions  and  heartless  philosophies, 
have  endeavoured  to  live  worthy  of  the  human  name, 
with  some  better  and  more  kindly  desires  than  those 
which  selfishness  dictates.  Thus  our  Saviour  tells  us 
of  the  judgment  by  which  He  will  judge  the  nations — 
that  is,  the  mass  of  mankind,  outside  the  line  of  the 
Chosen  People,  Jewish  or  Christian.  While  the  test 
for  the  elect  is  of  a  higher  character,  as  shewn  in  the 
Parables  of  the  Virgins  and  of  the  Talents,  the  test 
for  the  nations,  gathered  like  unenlightened  animals 
before  their  Judge  (S.  Matt.  xxv.  32),  is  that  of  simple 
humanity.  If  they  have  been  actively  kindhearted 
towards  those  in  need,  they  are  saved.  Not  that  such 
persons,  any  more  than  we,  have  atoned  for  their 
faults  by  their  good  works,  or  are  "  saved  by  the  law 
or  sect  which  they  have  professed."  Jesus  Christ 
is  their  Saviour ;  and  their  actions  have  shewn  a 
rudimentary  faith  in  Him.  Though  they  little  knew 
whom  they  were  befriending,  they  were  befriending 
Him.  They  were  not  yet  made  partakers  of  His 
Nature,  but  He  was  already  partaker  of  theirs, — and 
by  thus  claiming  their  place  as  true  human  beings, 
they  became  without  knowing  it,  eternally  attached 
to  Him.  They  were  "  of  the  truth,''  and  they  learn  to 
their  surprise  that  the  Voice  which  they  obeyed  was 
His  (S.  John  xviii.  37).  Everything  that  is  really 
human  belongs  to  Christ,  and  is  saved  by  Him ;  and 
we  may  be  sure  that  if  any  one  who  was  once  human 


4IO   Relations  of  the  Chttrch  with  them. 


is  finally  lost,  it  must  be  because  such  an  one  has 
finally  destroyed  in  himself  that  which  made  him  truly 
a  man,  refusing  the  likeness  of  God  and  at  last  ceasing 
to  bear  His  image.  But  it  is  not  probable  that  those 
whom  the  inscrutable  Providence  of  God  has  left  in 
darkness  in  this  life  will  rise  all  at  once  into  the 
full  stature  of  those  who  were  chosen  to  be  His 
children.  There  will  still  be  an  inner  and  an  outer 
circle  among  the  saved.  The  Church  will  even  then 
have  a  mission  to  those  who  are  not  yet  wholty 
incorporated  into  her,  but  are  willing  to  become  her 
tributaries,  her  subject  allies.  And  the  nations  shall 
walk  through  her  light,  and  the  kings  of  the  earth 
bring  their  glory  into  her  "  (Rev.  xxi.  24).  And  so, 
perhaps,  through  one  aeon  after  another,  those  who 
shared  the  Cross  of  Christ  upon  earth  may  keep 
ahead  of  others  who  follow  as  they  advance,  and  may 
be  the  means  of  revealing  the  wonders  of  the  ever- 
lasting Gospel  to  world  after  world. 

§  8. 

When  we  contemplate  the  blessedness  of  those 
who  are  saved,  we  are  forced  to  turn  to  the  terrible 
contrast  of  the  misery  of  the  lost.  Naturally  difficult 
in  itself,  the  subject  has  been  made  none  the  less  so 
by  the  controversies  of  recent  years.  A  matter  re- 
quiring the  most  grave  and  patient  treatment  has 
been  made  the  topic  of  unguarded  rhetoric  on  the  one 
side  and  on  the  other ;  and  it  has  almost  come  to  pass 
that  men  who  arc  willing  to  be  disciples  of  Christ  in 
other  things,  rebel  against  His  teaching  about  Hell. 


Contrast  of  the  Lost  and  the  Saved,  411 


For,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  the  clearest  and  the  most 
awe-inspiring  words  which  form  the  Church's  doctrine 
on  this  point,  are  words  of  our  Lord  Himself,  recorded 
in  the  Gospels. 

To  conceive  what  the  state  of  the  lost  will  be,  it 
will  suffice  to  mention  the  opposite  of  those  things 
which  form  the  bliss  of  heaven.  Instead  of  complete 
soundness  and  inward  unity,  our  Lord  speaks  of 
"destroying  both  soul  and  body  in  heir'  (S.  Matt. 
X.  28),  and  quotes  the  language  of  Isaiah  about  the 
"  worm  "  which  preys  unceasingly  upon  their  corrup- 
tion (S.  Mark  ix.  48;  Isa.  Ixvi.  24).  While  the 
righteous  enjoy  eternal  life  by  the  direct  sight  and 
knowledge  of  Christ,  the  lost  undergo  a  "  second 
death"  (Rev.  xxi.  8),  which  S.  Paul  describes  as  an 
eternal  perishing  from  the  face  of  the  Lord  and 
from  the  glory  of  His  might "  (2  Thess.  i.  9).  It  is 
what  our  Lord  taught,  when  He  said,  "  Then  will  I 
profess  unto  them,  I  never  knew  you :  depart  from 
Me  "  (S.  Matt.  vii.  23).  In  contrast  with  the  perfect 
new  world  in  which  the  saints  move  and  reign,  the 
only  surroundings  of  the  lost  which  our  Lord  mentions, 
are  those  of  "  the  hell  of  fire  "  (S.  Matt.  v.  22),  and 
"the  furnace  of  fire"  (S.  Matt.  xiii.  42),  and  "the 
outer  darkness"  (S.  Matt.  xxv.  30).  And  while  the 
saints  are  united  with  each  other  in  the  fellowship  of 
unhindered  love,  the  companionship  of  the  lost  is 
of  a  sadder  kind;  "Begone  from  Me,  accursed,  into 
the  fire,  the  eternal  fire,  which  hath  been  prepared  for 
the  devil  and  for  his  angels"  (S.  Matt.  xxv.  41). 
"In  the  time  of  harvest,  I  will  say  to  the  reapers, 


412     No7ie  staffer  beyond  their  Deserts. 


Gather  together  first  the  tares,  and  bind  them  into 
bundles  to  burn  them  "  (S.  Matt.  xiii.  30). 

The  objections  which  have  been  raised  against  the 
Gospel  teaching  on  this  matter  are  for  the  most  part 
generous  protests  against  doctrines  which  appeared 
to  obscure  either  the  love  or  the  justice  of  God. 
They  have,  however,  been  mostly  directed  against 
language  and  thoughts  to  which  the  Catholic  Church 
was  never  committed,  though  some  of  her  ministers 
may  have  supposed  that  she  was  so.  Before  Christ's 
teaching  about  the  eternity  of  chastisement  (S.  Matt. 
XXV.  46)  can  be  cordially  accepted,  it  is  necessary  to 
have  a  clear  notion  about  the  personages  to  whom  it 
is  to  be  applied.  We  may  be  absolutely  certain, 
to  begin  with,  that  none  will  suffer  it  who  do  not  fully 
deserve  it.  To  decide  whether  any  particular  person 
deserves  it  or  not,  does  not  fall  within  our  province, 
because  we  are  unable  to  tell  what  measure  of  grace 
has  been  given,  and  how  far  it  has  been  resisted,  and 
the  like.  But  we  may  certainly  trust  Him  who  died 
for  all  men,  not  to  pass  condemnation  upon  any  who 
might  have  received  a  different  sentence,  and  when 
the  time  comes,  every  one  will  understand  and  concur 
in  the  judgment  which  He  gives.  The  lost  may  be 
regarded  as  "  many,''  or  as  "  few ; "  for  those  are 
relative  terms  (S.  Luke  xiii.  23,  24);  but,  whether 
many  or  few,  they  will  be  lost,  not  because  they  were 
predestined  to  be  lost,  nor  because  God  would  not 
elect  them  to  partake  of  grace,  nor  because  His  Spirit 
was  weary  of  striving  with  them  and  gave  them  up 
before  they  were  fully  tested,  nor  because  they  failed 


The  Lost  perish  by  their  Wickedness.  413 


to  comply  with  a  standard  which  was  beyond  their 
reach,  nor  because  they  mistook  the  meaning  of  the 
Gospel  and  under  a  mistake  held  back  from  it.  All 
who  are  lost  will  be  lost  by  their  own  fault,  in  spite 
of  warnings  and  assistances.  They  will  be  lost,  not 
because  they  were  weak,  or  unimaginative,  or  stupid  ; 
but  because  they  were  wicked, — because,  when  con- 
science appealed  to  them,  they  silenced  it, — because 
they  wilfully  quenched  what  light  they  had, — because 
they  chose  what  was  wrong,  knowing  that  it  was 
wrong,  and  preferring  it  to  the  right — and  that 
not  once  or  twice,  but  persistently,  and  with  increas- 
ing persistence,  and  to  the  end,  until  they  had 
destroyed  in  themselves  the  faculties  which  might 
have  expanded  into  faith,  hope,  and  charity,  which 
are  the  life  of  the  soul.  They  will  be  lost  because 
they  have  fixed  and  determined  their  characters  for 
evil ;  so  that  all  good  that  could  be  offered  them 
further  would  only  be  made  food  for  fresh  evil.  They 
have  become  like  devils  and  not  like  men. 

Here  lies  the  answer  to  that  plea  so  often  urged  by 
tender  hearts  that  a  just  and  merciful  God  cannot  go 
on  for  ever  and  ever  punishing  men  for  what  they  did 
on  earth.  Life  on  earth  was  short ;  and  it  is  an 
exaggeration  to  say  that  the  sin  of  a  finite  being  is 
itself  infinite.  How  then  can  it  be  right  to  prolong 
punishment  out  of  all  proportion  to  the  deeds  of  sin  ? 
But  that  is  not  really  what  God  does.  He  is  dealing 
not  merely  with  the  past  actions  of  these  unhappy 
beings,  but  with  their  present  character.  The  earthly 
life  both  shewed  what  they  were,  and  made  them 


414    Characters,  not  Acts,  are  pttnished. 


what  they  became ;  and  God  treats  them  accordingly. 
God  must  deal  with  facts  as  facts.  He  cannot  pre- 
tend that  things  are  different  from  what  they  are. 
It  is  true  that,  while  we  are  still  under  probation,  He 
holds  His  hand,  and  does  not  deal  with  us  after  our 
sin  nor  reward  us  after  our  iniquities;  because,  if 
He  did,  we  should  have  no  opportunity  of  amendment. 
But,  when  probation  has  had  its  w^ork,  there  is 
nothing  to  be  gained  by  continuing  an  attitude  of 
reserve.  Mercy  persistently  spurned  on  earth  would 
be  equally  spurned  somewhere  else.  It  would  be  of 
no  use  to  give  the  lost  a  fresh  beginning  in  a  new  life 
of  probation ;  for  before  they  could  really  start  fair, 
the  whole  memory  of  the  earthly  life,  and  all  its 
inv/rought  eflfects  upon  the  soul,  must  be  obliterated, 
in  which  case  the  men  would  not  really  be  the  same 
men,  but  only  nominally  the  same ;  neither  can  God 
do  anything  so  capricious  as  to  annihilate  the  past. 
Or  if,  on  the  other  hand,  the  men  were  put  to  begin- 
life  again,  on  earth,  or  in  paradise,  or  in  heaven 
with  the  character  which  they  had  formed  before 
death,  they  would  only  repeat  the  same  kind  of  history 
on  the  new  scene.  If,  indeed,  there  were  any  case, 
in  which  character  had  not  had  sufficient  opportunity 
of  declaring  itself  in  this  life,  God  would  undoubtedly 
give  it  some  other  opportunity ;  but  to  His  eye,  with 
its  unerring  observation,  this  life  is  trial  enough,  and 
in  rewarding  and  punishing  alike,  God  is  not  reward- 
ing or  punishing  Avhat  has  once  for  all  been  done, 
ljut  the  being  who  still  is  what  his  act^^  prove  and 
make  him. 


The  Penalty  is,  to  be  what  they  are.  415 


It  will  now  be  evident  that  the  punishment  of  the 
lost  is  not  of  an  arbitrary  kind,  like  the  penalties 
of  human  law.  Amongst  men,  in  order  to  ensure 
obedience,  it  is  agreed  that  those  who  infringe  a 
regulation  shall  pay  a  fixed  fine,  or  be  imprisoned  for 
a  certain  length  of  time,  or  have  so  many  lashes. 
The  arrangement  is  simply  conventional,  and  a  power 
is  lodged  somewhere  of  remitting  the  penalty  at  dis- 
cretion. But  in  the  moral  world  it  is  all  different. 
The  penalty  of  being  a  drunkard  or  a  hypocrite  is  not 
to  pass  so  many  days  in  hell,  or  to  be  tortured  with 
so  many  degrees  of  heat,  the  penalty  is,  to  be  a 
drunkard  or  a  hypocrite.  It  works  like  a  law  of 
physical  nature.  It  adapts  itself  with  the  most 
minute  equity  to  each  individual  case,  making  the 
more  hardened  offender  suffer  more,  and  the  less 
hardened  less.  These  are  the  things  which  make 
the  pains  of  hell.  Stripes,  and  hard  labour,  and 
terms  of  penal  servitude  may  be  remitted  or  relaxed ; 
but  what  can  remit  to  a  man  his  being  what  he  is, 
and  what  he  still  chooses  to  be  ? 

Not  that  the  law  is  so  entirely  self-acting  as  to 
exclude  all  personal  action  on  the  part  of  God.  There 
is  no  reason  to  shrink  from  the  belief,  awful  though  it 
is,  that  God  Himself  applies  His  own  laAv  to  every 
condemned  soul,  even  as  He  applies  His  salvation  to 
every  one  that  is  saved.  His  breath  it  is,  in  the 
Prophet's  language,  Avhich  kindles  the  fire  for  them 
(Isa.  XXX.  33).  For,  though  the  most  part  of  their 
penalty  is  that  which  comes  to  them  by  an  inevitable 
sequence, — to  be  what  they  are, — yet  they  might  con- 


41 6    Retribtttive  Element  in  the  Penalty. 


ceivably  be  what  they  are  without  knowing  it.  But 
this  God  does  not  allow.  It  is  not  His  will  that  they 
should  go  on  for  ever  deceiving  themselves,  and 
thinking  that  sin  brings  no  evil  consequences.  He  is 
determined  to  bring  home  to  them  the  true  character 
of  their  deeds.  I  will  reprove  thee,"  He  says,  "  and 
set  before  thee  the  things  which  thou  hast  done" 
(Ps.  1.  21).  If  they  would  not  learn  it  in  penitence, 
by  seeing  what  it  cost  their  Saviour,  they  must  be 
made  to  learn  it  in  some  other  way.  We  could  not 
otherwise  understand  how  God  could  be  a  righteous 
God.  If  indeed  men's  sins  were  only  a  personal 
offence  to  Himself,  and  a  crossing  of  His  private 
wishes,  so  to  speak,  then  He  might  mercifully  pass 
them  over  in  silence  for  ever,  and  lavish  benefits  upon 
the  doers,  even  though  they  still  continued  to  grieve 
Him.  But  sin  is  an  outrage  upon  the  world,  and 
upon  men  in  general,  and  upon  the  sinner  s  own  soul, 
and  upon  the  eternal  and  unchangeable  principles  of 
justice  which  God  is  bound  to  maintain ;  and  there- 
fore He  cannot  but  constrain  every  soul  which  has 
transgressed  to  recognise,  one  way  or  another,  the 
majesty  and  sanctity  of  the  law.  This  is  the  ven- 
geance which  He  takes.  Our  conception  of  righteous- 
ness, and  of  the  righteousness  of  God,  is  not  that 
which  is  set  forth  in  Holy  Scripture,  if  we  exclude 
from  it  the  idea  of  retribution.  Retribution,  the 
rendering  to  all  men  exactly  what  they  deserve,  is 
not  the  whole  of  justice,  but  it  is  an  important 
element  in  it ;  and  where  retribution  is  lost  sight  of, 
government  is  enfeebled  and  becomes  immoral.  Our 


Love  itself  inflicts  the  Penalty.       4 1 7 


Lord,  therefore,  does  not  hesitate  to  say  that  ven- 
geance  will  be  taken  for  the  wrongs  of  the  elect 
(S.  Luke  xviii.  7) ;  and  S.  Paul  says  the  same 
(2  Thess.  i.  6  foil.);  and  it  is  assumed  that  all 
healthy  souls  will  be  glad  that  it  should  be  so,  and 
will  rejoice  to  see  Babylon  treated  as  she  deserves  to 
be  treated  (Rev.  xix.  1-8). 

It  conducts  us  to  the  same  result,  if  we  think  of 
God  as  love ;  for  the  ends  of  love  and  justice  can 
never  be  opposed  to  each  other.  When  God  is  said  to 
be  love,  it  is  not  for  a  moment  to  be  thought  that  He 
loves  everything  and  every  one  alike.  He  can  only 
love  what  is  truly  loveable.  There  is  nothing  love- 
able  in  sin,  but  the  very  contrary ;  and  even  because 
He  is  love  God  cannot  help  hating  it.  And  in  so  far 
as  any  being,  angelic  or  human,  voluntarily  identifies 
itself  with  sin,  God  cannot  help  hating  that  being. 
Satan,  and  those  who  take  part  with  him,  put  them- 
selves outside  of  God's  love ;  or  rather,  love,  in  dealing 
with  them,  can  only  shew  itself  in  the  form  of  hatred. 
Love  does  not  make  an  exception  in  disfavour  of  the 
lost ;  on  the  contrary,  it  acts  towards  them  in  its 
normal  way,  manifesting  its  detestation  and  abhor- 
rence and  fury  with  them  as  much  for  their  own 
sakes  as  for  the  sake  of  others.  Hell  and  its  torments 
are  the  last  resource  of  love,  which  it  employs  with 
the  deepest  grief  to  itself,  yet  with  unhesitating  firm- 
ness and  satisfaction,  because  it  knows  that,  when 
souls  have  reached  such  a  point  of  wickedness,  it  is 
the  kindest,  as  well  as  the  most  righteous  thing  to  do. 
Anything  else  would  do  them  harm;  and  God  does 

2  E 


41 8    The  Punishment  Eternal  as  the  Life. 


not  wish  them  harm,  though  they  may  have  made  it 
impossible  for  Him  to  do  them  good.  Difficult  as  it 
seems  to  imagine  it  now,  the  tenderest  mother  o£  a 
lost  son  will  in  heaven  not  only  acquiesce  in  the  doom 
which  Christ  pronounces  upon  Him,  but  will  be  thank- 
ful for  it,  and  say,  "  Thou,  Lord,  art  merciful ;  for 
Thou  rewardest  every  man  according  to  his  work  " 
(Ps.  Ixii.  12). 

If  this  be  true,  and  hell  is  the  best  place  (so  to 
speak)  for  the  lost  to  be  in,  they  are  not  likely  to  be 
set  at  liberty  from  it,  which  would  mea^n  a  transfer- 
ence to  a  place  less  advantageous  for  them.  When 
the  Church  is  asked  if  their  punishment  will  endure 
for  ever,  she  can  only  reply  that  God  has  not  told  her 
of  any  end  or  limit  to  it,  and  that  where  He  has  not 
spoken,  she  cannot  speak.  Christ's  word,  "  eternal," 
is  not,  indeed,  the  same  as  "  everlasting."  It  does  not 
express  an  interminable  succession  in  time,  but  some- 
thing which  transcends  time.  It  ihight  even  be  sup- 
posed in  some  circumstances  to  suggest  a  fixed  period, 
and  might  be  translated  "  age-long."  But  the  point  to 
be  observed  is  that  our  Lord  used  the  same  epithet,  in 
the  same  context,  to  describe  the  portions  of  the  saved 
and  of  the  lost  alike.  If  the  life  is  eternal,  so  is  the 
punishment ;  if  the  word  fixes  a  period  to  the  punish- 
ment, it  fixes  a  period  to  the  life  (S.  Matt.  xxv.  4C). 
Perhaps  some  passages  which  have  been  thought  to 
indicate  endless  time  may  be  otherwise  interpreted. 
For  instance,  when  our  Lord  says,  "  Their  worm  dieth 
not,  and  the  fire  is  not  quenched  "  (S.  Mark  ix.  48), 
the  thought  is  rather  that  of  unintermittency  than 


No  Indication  of  Ptmishment  ending.    4 1 9 


that  o£  interminableness.  And  again,  there  are  a  few 
sayings  which  appear  to  encourage  the  thought  of  a 
limit  that  may  be  reached.  Such  is  the  saying,  Thou 
shalt  by  no  means  come  out  thence,  till  thou  hast  paid 
the  uttermost  farthing"  (S.  Matt.  v.  26).  But  this 
expression  is  of  the  nature  of  a  parable  or  metaphor, 
and  is  used  for  a  very  different  purpose  from  that  of 
inspiring  hope  in  the  midst  of  sin.  The  utmost,  then, 
that  can  be  said  is  this.  We  do  not  know  what  will 
answer  to  temporal  succession  when  we  pass  out  of 
our  present  state,  and  therefore  cannot  press  dog- 
matically the  language  which  seems  to  teach  an  endless 
duration  of  punishment.  Our  knowledge  of  God's 
character  convinces  us  that  He  will  punish  no  one 
more  severely  than  is  necessary,  nor  for  an  instant 
longer  than  he  deserves,  and  that  if  at  any  point  some 
Boul  in  hell  could  be  found  to  turn  and  repent  and 
cease  to  oppose  itself  to  love  and  holiness,  it  would 
cease  to  be  punished  as  it  had  been  punished.  It  may 
be  added  that  God,  who  has  no  pleasure  in  the  death 
of  a  sinner,  would  not  be  likely  to  spare  any  pains  to 
bring  the  lost  round,  if  it  were  possible  for  such  a  thing 
to  happen,  and  that  no  imaginable  treatment  which 
they  could  receive  would  be  more  likely  to  conduce  to 
such  an  end  than  the  treatment  which  they  will  re- 
ceive in  hell.  But  after  all  is  said,  the  fact  remains, 
that  in  Holy  Scripture  this  life  is  constantly  regarded 
as  the  time  for  fixing  character,  that  the  judgment  of 
the  Last  Day  is  spoken  of  as  absolute  and  conclusive, 
and  that  the  condition  of  those  who  are  then  con- 
demned is  set  over  against  the  condition  of  those  who 


42 o    Reconciliation  of  Things  in  Heaven. 


are  justified  without  a  hint  that  the  one  is  more 
transient  than  the  other. 

§  9- 

Here  the  doctrine  of  the  Church  and  of  the  Bible 
leaves  us.  It  shews  us  evil  absolutely  separated  from 
good,  and  rendered  incapable  of  doing  any  further 
mischief,  and  made  to  feel — not  by  force,  but  by 
moral  means — its  inherent  weakness  and  folly.  It 
shews  us  evil  subjugated  to  good,  and  acknowledging 
its  subjugation.  If  any  of  those  great  Principalities 
in  heaven,  who  watch  the  drama  of  human  life  and 
learn  by  it  (Eph.  iii.  10),  were  uncertain  at  the  outset 
whether  evil  would  prove  stronger  than  good,  they 
are  now  convinced.  If  some  were  inclined  to  waver 
in  their  allegiance,  and  to  indulge  in  some  degree 
of  sympathy  with  the  revolt  of  Satan,  the  moment 
is  come  when  they  make  their  confession  and  are 
reconciled  through  Christ  (Col.  i.  20).  The  sight  of 
the  completed  salvation  of  the  saints  removes  the 
last  vestige  of  a  doubt,  and  they  fall  before  the  throne 
with  a  heartfelt  and  adoring  "Amen"  (Kev.  vii.  12). 
There  is  no  more  room  for  question.  Evil  has  had 
every  chance,  and  has  utterly  failed,  and  has  only 
recoiled  upon  the  heads  of  those  who,  in  defiance  of 
love  and  holiness,  sold  themselves  to  it. 

This  is  enough  for  us  to  know.  If  there  be  any- 
thing further  to  come,  we  are  not  told  of  it.  The 
"times  of  restitution  of  all  the  things  which  God 
spake  by  the  mouth  of  His  holy  prophets"  are  the 
times  of  the  return  of  Jesus  from  heaven  (Acts  iii. 


The  yudgment  closes  our  Vista.  421 


21).  There  is  nothing  to  indicate  an  interval  between 
the  "coming"  o£  Christ  and  "the  end,  when  He 
delivers  up  the  kingdom  to  God,  even  the  Father; 
when  He  shall  bring  to  nought  every  principality  and 
every  authority  and  power/'  subjecting  even  death, 
the  last  enemy,  to  His  feet,  and  then  Himself  be- 
coming subject  to  the  Father  in  whose  strength  He 
has  triumphed,  "  that  God  may  be  all  things  in  all " 
(1  Cor.  XV.  24-28).  The  Return,  the  Resurrection, 
the  Judgment,  close  the  Church's  vista  for  the  pre- 
sent, with  Heaven  and  Hell  dimly  seen  stretching 
beyond.  It  may  be  that  in  some  unrevealed  future, 
evil  will  no  more  be  exhibited  only  as  inheriting  its 
own  reward,  but  will  be  put  out  of  actual  existence 
altogether.  If  it  be  so,  the  method  is  unknown  to 
us.  To  annihilate  beings  still  clinging  resolutely  to 
evil  would  seem  to  be  no  triumph  of  goodness,  but 
a  confession  of  failure.  To  cure  Satan  and  those  who 
are  his — for  it  is  hardly  logical  to  dissociate  them 
from  him — and  so  reduce  evil  once  more  to  the  purely 
notional  existence  out  of  which  Satan  called  it, — this 
would  be  the  only  way  that  would  satisfy  our  concep- 
tions of  an  abolition  of  evil.  Such  a  conversion  may 
not  be  beyond  the  power  of  God.  It  need  not  neces- 
sarily involve  the  admission  of  the  unhappy  beings  to 
a  bliss  for  which  they  are  too  late.  But  to  teach  for 
a  doctrine  of  faith  such  a  final  purging  of  evil  out 
of  all  wills  would  be  rash  in  the  extreme.  If  not 
opposed  to  the  spirit  of  Scripture,  it  can  hardly  be 
reconciled  with  the  letter  of  it.  Nor  is  it  necessary 
to  count  upon  it.    It  is  sufficient  for  our  present 


422 


Complete  Victory  of  Good. 


needs  to  be  assured  that  justice  will  be  done, — that 
the  event  o£  the  long  day  o£  time  will  not  be  doubtful 
in  the  end, — that  it  will  be  no  indecisive  battle  between 
good  and  evil,  or  one  in  which  good  comes  off  barely 
conqueror,  and  evil  with  a  creditable  defeat.  The 
defeat  of  evil,  whatever  form  it  takes,  will  be  a  perfect 
defeat,  leaving  nothing  to  be  desired,  nothing  still 
in  the  enemy's  hands.  God  will  have  triumphed  in 
a  manner  worthy  of  God,  and  His  redeemed  children 
vf  ill  see  it  and  be  satisfied. 


TABLE  OF  PATRISTIC  PASSAGES 
REFERRED  TO 


^S*.  Ambrose — 

p.  48  .  .  .  De  Spiritu  Sancto,  lib.  III.  cap.  xvi.  §  109. 

Athanashis — 

p.   71  .  .  .  De  Incarnatione  Verbi  Dei,  §  3  E. 

p.   89  .  .  .  ibid.  §  3  F. 

p.  163  .  ibid.  §  41  A,  42  B. 

p.  166  ..  .  ibid..§  6  B. 

p.  184  .  .  .  ibid.  §  14  F. 

p.  292  .  .  .  ibid.  §  54  D. 

p.  381  .  .  .  ibid.  §  16  A. 

[PsettdO'A  thaiiasius]  — 

p.  158  .  .  .  De  Incarnatione  et  contra  Arianos,  §  i. 

S,  Augustine — 

p.  271  .  .  .  Collatio  cum  Donatistis,  dies  iii.  §  10. 

p.  319  .  .  .  Sermo  ad  Infantes,  cclxxii.  C,  E. 

p.  323  .  .  .  Confessions,  lib.  X.  §  69. 

p.  326  .  De  Civitate  Dei,  lib.  X.  §  6  F. 

p.  332  .  .  .  Tractatus  in  Joan.  Evang.,  cii.  §  i. 

p.  375  .  .  .  Enchiridion,  §  ex.  (29). 

6*.  Basil— 

p.   22  .  .  .  Epist.  xvi.  (Ad  Eunomium), 

p.  258  ..  .  De  Fide,  p.  224  D. 

p.  303  .  .  .  Moralia,  reg.  xxi.  §  2. 

S»  Bernard—^ 

p.  129  .  .  .  Epist.  clxxiv. 

p.  195  .  .  .  De  Erroribus  Abaelardi,  §  8. 

p.  383  .  .  .  De  Conversione,  cap.  iv.  §  6, 


424    Table  of  Patristic  Passages  referred  to. 


S.  Chysostom — 

p.  317    •    •    •  In  Ep.  I.  ad  Corinth.,  Horn.  xxiv.  p.  288  C 
(Oxford). 

^S*.  Cyril  of  Alexandria — 

p.  152    .    .    .  e.g.  Quod  Unus  sit  Christus,  p.  737  B. 

S,  Cyril  of  Jerusalem — 

p.  249    .    .    .  Catech.,  xviii.  23  (p.  296). 

S,  Gregory  of  Nyssa — 

p.  314    .    .    .  Catech.  Orat.  Magna,  §  37  C. 

S.  Irenacus — 

p.  23    .     .     .  Adv.  Haer.,  IV.  vi.  4. 

p.  282    .     .     .  ibid.  IV.  xvii.  5,  and  V.  ii.  2. 

p.  296    .     .     .  ibid.  II.  xxii.  4. 

S,  Justin  Martyr — 

p.  314    .     .    .  Apol.  I.  §  66. 

p.  328    .     .     .  Dial,  cum  Tryphone,  pp.  296,  297. 

Origen — 

p.    79    .     .     .  De  Principiis,  lib.  I.  57  foil. 

p.   82    .     .    .  Horn,  in  Num.  xiv.  p.  680  (Migne). 

S,  Pad  an — 

p.  259    .    .    .  Epist.  i.  4. 

S,  PolycarJ),  Martyrdom  of— 

pp.  248,  249  "    .  cap.  16;  19. 

S.  Vincent  of  Lerins — 

p.  258    .    .    .  Commonitorium  I.  §  23. 

p.  263    .    .     .  ibid.  I.  §  2. 


\_T/ie  author  regrets  that  he  has  been  unable  as  yet  to  verify  the  saying 
cited'  by  memory  from  S,  Leo  on  p.  203.  ] 


INDEX  OF  TEXTS. 


Genesis. 

PAGE 

i.  1,  21,  27   92 

i.  2  91,  225 

i.  26.........95» 

i.  26,  27    100 

i.  28  Q2,  loi,  405 

i.  31  '....99,  186 

ii.  2   92 

ii.  7  95^  9^ 

ii.  8,  9   102 

ii.  15-17   102 

ii.  23,24   112 

iii.  1   103 

iii.  G   103 

iii.  14   109 

iii.  20  112,  273 

V.  3   115 

vi.  2,  4   106 

vi.  3  ,   227 

xxii.  15   84 

xxviii.  1,  2   81 

xxxii.  2   87 

xxxii.  30   19 

Exodus. 

iii.  14   22 

xii.  14   327 

xii.  46   213 

xxiv.  8   324 

Leviticus. 

xvii.  11   322 

Deuteronomy. 

Ti.  4   24 

xii.  23   322 

xxi.  23   197 

xxxii.  47   43 

Judges. 

ii.  1    84 


II.  Samuel. 

PAGE 

xxiv.  10,  17   82 

I.  Kings. 

xvii.  6   85 

xix.  5,  G   84 

II.  Kings. 

vi.  17   85 

xix.  35   82 

Job. 

xi.  7,  8   23 

xxxviii.  4,  7  ... .  81 

Psalms. 

vii.  9   37 

xi.  G   204 

xi.  7   38 

xiv.  1  3j  n. 

xviii.  10  . ,  c. .  . .  82 

xxii.  1   203 

xxiv.  10   87 

xl.  7,  8   193 

1.  21  . .  174,  182,  416 

li.  5   130 

Iii.  7   107 

liii.  1   3, 

Ixii.  12   418 

Ixvi.  13   328,  71. 

Ixxi.  15   38 

Ixxviii.  25   109 

xc.  4   30 

xc.  8   .  .  .  382 

xci.  11,  12    84 

c.  2   9 

ciii.  20   85 

civ.  4   82 

civ.  31   73 

cxv.  IG   92 

cxxix.  5,  G   241 


Psalms. 

PAGE 

exxxii.  1   387 

cxxxix.  7,  8,12..  28 

cxlix.  5   234 

Proverbs. 

viii.  22-31   78 

Ecclesiastes. 

iii.  21   97 

xii.  7   97 

Isaiah. 

vi.2   38,^5 

xxvi.  12    356 

xxvi.  20   384 

XXX.  33   415 

xxxii.  17   369 

xliii.  27   117 

xliv.  8   25 

xlvi.  9,  10   31 

liii.  3   192 

liii.  5   203 

liii.  G   200 

liii.  12   323 

Ivii.  1,  2   234 

Ixiii.  4,  5.   200 

Ixiv.  8   176 

Ixvi.  24   411 

Jeremiah. 

i.  5   114 

Ezekiel. 

i.  20   83 

xvi.  G3   383 

xviii.  32   323 

Daniel. 

iii.  28   84 

vi.  22   84 


426 


Index  of  Texts. 


Daniel. 

PAGE 

viii.  16   84 

ix.  21   88 

X.  8   86 

X.  18    84 

X.  19   86 

X.  20,  21   87 

Amos. 

iii.  2   124 

Nahum. 

i.  2-6  . . ,   38 

Habakkuk. 

i-  13   37?  104 

ill.  4   159 

Zecharlah. 

i.  8   85 

vi.  13  .    330 

viii.  16   10 

xii.  10   181,  213 

xiii.  1    213 

Malachi. 

i.  11   325 

iii.  6   32 

II.  Esdras. 

iv.  1  0   88 

Tobit. 

xii.  15   88 

Wisdom. 

i.  7   226 

iii.  1   384 

viii.  1   80 

xi.  23   182 

xii.  1   226 

Ecclesiasticus. 

XV.  20   347 

S.  Matthew, 

i.  3,  5,  6   129 

i.  20   127 

ii.  13   84 

iii.  16   223 

iii.  17   186 

V.  14   233 

V.22   411 


S.  Matthew. 

PAGE 

V.  26   419 

V.  48   37 

vii.  6   296 

vii.  23   411 

viii.  20   192 

viii.  28   256 

X.  28   411 

xi.  11   294 

xi.  27  23,  176 

xii.  34,  36,  37  . . .  365 

xiii.  24-30   246 

xiii.  30  412 

xiii.  42  411 

xvi.  18   229,  264 

xvi.  19   265 

xvii.  20   360 

xvii.  27   44 

xviii.  3   363 

xviii.  10   83 

xviii.  20  . . .  274,  332 

xix.  5   341 

xix.  6   342 

xix.  11,  12   342 

xix.  28  396,  408 

XX.  28   205 

xxi.  16   296 

xxii.  29   388 

xxii.  32   389 

xxiv.  14   396 

xxiv.  44   395 

XXV.  1-13  409 

XXV.  14-30   409 

XXV.  30   411 

XXV.  32   409 

XXV.  41   411 

XXV.  46  412,  418 

xxvi.  26  . . .  .309,  311 
xxvi.  28   324 

xxvi.  38   147 

xxvii.  46  . . .  203,  205 

xxviii.  2   82 

xxviii.  4   86 

xxviii.  17   391 

xxviii.  19  . . .  43,  246, 

298 

S.  Mark. 

ii.  8   147 

V.  2   256 

vi.  13   339 

viii.  12   147 


S.  Mark. 

PAGE 

viii.  36   99 

ix.  43-47    393 

ix.  48  411,  418 

X.  14   296 

x.  18   189 

X.  45   205 

xiv.  24   322 

xlv.  33,  34   196 

xvi.  12   391 

xvi.  15   273 

xvi.  18   339 

S.  Luke. 

i.  19,  20   86 

i.  19,  26   88 

ii.  10   84 

ii.  12   159 

ii.  14   159 

ii.  49   152 

ii.  52   151 

iv.  13   188 

v.  17   265 

ix.  31   J  94 

ix.  41   194 

X.  16   261 

X,  21   .  147 

xi.  20   225 

xii.  2   398 

xii.  6,  7   27 

xiii.  23,  24    412 

xvi.  22   378 

xvi.  23    379 

xvii.  24   398 

xviii.  7   417 

xix.  17,  19   408 

XX.  13   170 

XX.  36             85,  405 

XX.  38   389 

xxi.  25   396 

xxii.  25,  20    408 

xxii.  42   149 

xxii.  43   86 

xxiii.  43  . . .  212,  378, 

3S6 

xxiii.  46   147 

xxiv.  31   391 

xxiv.  33   266 

xxiv.  39   390 

S.  John, 
i.  1  61,  65 


Index  of  Texts. 


S.  John. 

PAGE 

i.  3  77,  80 

i.3,4   78 

i.  4   79 

i.  4,  5,  9   122 

i.  H  133,  157 

i.  16   355 

i.  18   77 

i.  51   81 

iii.  5   288 

iii.  6  23,  293 

iii.  8   294 

iii.  13  156, 

iii.  16   180 

iii.  21   15 

iii.  34   224 

iv.  24  20,  21 

iv.  42   7 

V.  4   82 

V.  19,  20   67 

V.  22,  27   400 

V.  23   66 

V.  26  65,  304 

V.  29   393 

V.  30  67,  190 

V.  37   20 

V.  43   176 

vi.  27,  33,  35,  51, 

53,  57   306 

vi.  38  149,  153 

vi.  44    357 

vi.  54  317,  392 

vi.  57  66,  304 

vi.  63  20,  273 

vii.  39  228 

viii.  31,  32  260 

viii.  40   137 

viii.  44   106 

viii.  58   138 

ix.  4   380 

X.  16  244,  n, 

X.  18   195 

X.28   374 

X.  35   294 

X.  36    122 

xi.  9   380 

xi.  33  147,  187 

xii.  24   217 

xiii.  7   296 

xiii.  10   335 

xiii.  14   335 

xiii.  21   147 


S.  John. 

PAGE 

xiv.  2   386 

xiv.  6  89,  161,  252 

xiv.  9   175 

xiv.  16  44.,  219 

xiv.  18,  23   222 

xiv.  26  45,  226 

xiv.  28   66 

XV.  10,  11    193 

XV.  26   221 

xvi.  7   219 

xvi.  13... 67,  252,  259 

xvi.  14,  15  67,  223 

xvii.  3   51 

xvii.  4,  5   60 

xvii.  5   153 

xvii.  11   245 

xvii.  21,  22   69 

xviii.  37   409 

xix.  28   138 

xix.  32-37  213 

xix.  33,  34  212 

xix.  42   212 

XX.  17  44,  211 

XX.  20   390 

XX.  21   264 

XX.  22  224,  230 

XX.  23.... 335,  71.,  336 

XX.  26   391 

XX.  28  64,  311 

Acts. 

1.  9   391 

ii.  17   220 

ii.  22   137 

ii.  31  212,  213 

ii.  33   222 

ii.  38  2S9,  298 

iii.  21   420 

iv.  32   235 

vi.  3   268 

vi.  15   86 

vii.  35   206 

vii.  59   386 

viii.  14   302 

viii.  15-17   299 

X.  4   326 

X.  41  -390 

xii.  7,  10   84 

xii.  15   83 

xii.  23   82 

xiv.  16   123 


Acts. 

PAGE 

xvi.  7   225 

xvii.  11   260 

xvii.  26   Ill 

xvii.  28   176 

xvii.  31   137 

xix.  3   298 

XX.  28  143, 

xxii.  16   289 

xxvi.  14   357 

Romans. 

i.  20   3 

i.  21,  25   123 

ii.  14,  15   123 

iii.  24   286 

iii.  25,  26    183 

iii.  28   366 

V.  1   369 

V.  5-8   180 

V.  15   137 

V.  18,  19   195 

V.  19   117 

vi.  3   287 

viii.  2   226 

viii.  7   121 

viii.  19-22   loi 

viii.  20-23    396 

viii.  24   403 

viii.  26  222,  334 

viii.  29   293 

viii.  29,  80   345 

viii.  33   399 

viii.  39   382 

ix.  5   65 

X.  9   367 

X.  10   360 

X.  17   274 

xi.  5   346 

xi.  6   356 

xi.  15   396 

xi.  36   73 

xiv.  7   no 

xvi.  27   27 

I.  Corinthians. 

i.  17   210 

i.  25   159 

i.  30   366 

ii.  10   222 

ii.  10,  11    62 

ii.  14   98 


4^8  Index  of  Texts. 


I.  Corinthians. 

PAGE 

ii.  16   232 

iii.  16   229 

iv.  5   399 

vi.  2,  3   93 

vi.  11   368 

vi.  19  229,  301 

vii.  38   342 

viii.  6   64 

X.  2   287 

X.  13   37 

X.  16   317 

X.  17   318 

xi.  3   186 

xi.  7   Ill 

xi.  10   85 

xi.  25  ....  324,  328,  71. 

xi.  26   327 

xi.  27   320 

xi.  32..'.   377 

xii.  11  .  .222,  255,  301 

xii.  12   231 

xiii.  4-7   39 

xiii.  12,  13  403 

XV.  14   214 

XV.  24-  28  421 

XV.  38   391 

XV.  41  406 

XV.  42,  43    392 

XV.  44. . .  98,  215,  392 

XV.  45   218 

XV.  47  135,  218 

XV.  50   321 

XV.  52   394 

XV.  56   198 

II.  Corinthians. 

i.  20-22    302 

iii.  17   226 

iii.  17, 18   64 

iii.  18  403 

iv.  2   260 

V.  1-9  379,  11. 

V.  2,  4   194 

V.  7  403 

V.  8  382,  386 

V.14   182 

V.  17   368 

V.  19   29 

V.  21  183,  286 

viii.  9   153 

xii.  4   382 


II.  Corinthians. 

PAGE 

xii.  15   39 

xiii.  14   234 

Galatians. 
ii.  17   286 

ii.  20  ...180,  287,343 

iii.  5  227 

iii.  27   287 

iii.  28   162 

iv.  2   93 

iv.  4  121,  127,  395 

iv.  6   224 

iv.  8,  9   123 

iv.  26   273 

Ephesians. 

i.  4,  5    169 

i.  5   292 

i.  7   286 

i.  9,  10   169 

i.  21   87 

i.  22,  23    231 

ii.  3   116 

ii.  10   346 

iii.  9-11    169 

iii.  10    77,  420 

iii.  11   77 

iii.  18   381 

iii.  19   95 

iv.  3   245 

iv.  4    238 

iv.  5  245 

iv.  6  28,  71 

iv.  9    153,  277 

iv.  10  ..134,  234,  277, 

316 

iv.  12,  13    245 

iv.  25   338 

iv.  30    222,  302 

V.  25    343 

V.  26    247 

V.  27    264 

Phillppians. 

i.  G   376 

i.  23   386 

ii.  5   232 

ii.  6   134 

ii.  6,  7   153 

ii.  7  ...  158,  186,  203, 

216 


Philippians. 

PAGE 

ii.  8   193,  197 

ii.  13   356 

iii.  11   392 

Colossians. 

i.  16   72,  87,  88 

i.  17   80 

i.  18   219 

i.  19   68 

i.  20    420 

ii.  9   158 

ii.  19   287 

iii.  11    162 

I.  Thessalonians. 

iv.  14   385,  386 

iv.  15-17  ....  393, 

V.  19   275 

V.  23    98 

II.  Thessalonians. 

  37 

i.  6-10  417 

i.  9   204,  411 

ii-  8   397 

ii.  10  260 

iii.  14,  15    243 

I.  Timothy. 

i-  1   179 

i.  11   33 

ii.  4   346 

ii.  5   137 

ii.  6   206 

ii.  13   112 

ii.  14   108 

iii.  6    105 

iii.  16    147 

iv.  5   315 

iv.  10   408 

V.  22    269 

vi.  15   33,  88 

vi.  16    36 

vi.  20   252 

II.  Timothy. 

i.  6   281 

i.  7   340 

i.  10    179,389 

i.  18   387 

ii.  2    269 


Index  of  Texts. 


429 


II.  Timothy. 

PAGE 

ii.  8   162 

ii.  13   34 

ii.  15   250 

iii.  16    255 

Titus. 

i.  5   269 

i.  12   123 

ii.  13   64 

iii.  5   291 

iii.  8    360 

Hebrews. 

i.  2   220 

i.  3   80 

i.  14   84 

ii.  5,  G   93 

ii.  7   86 

ii.  9  ...  153,  196,  203 

ii.  10   72,  166 

ii.  13   189 

ii.  17   2O0,  400 

iii.  2    200 

iv.  12   98 

iv.  15   189 

V.  5,  6    218 

V.  7   134,333 

V.  8               190,  192 

vi.  2   399 

vi.  4-6   374 

vi.  5   300 

vi.  18   34 

vii.  22   208 

vii.  26   166 

ix.  12   323 

ix.  12,  24    219 

ix.  25   323 

X.  12   216 

X.  29    376 

X.  39    99 

xi.  1    125 

xi.  3   2 

xi.  5,  6    2 

xii.  14               .  403 

xii.  24   324 

xii.  28,  29    39 

xiii.  8  .........  134 


S.  James. 

PAGE 

i.  2   371 

i.  13   34 

i.  18  71,  408 

i.  25   37»  276 

ii.  24   365 

iii.  9   64 

iii.  15   98 

iv.  5   222 

v.  14   339 

v.  16    337 

I.  S.  Peter. 

i.  2    347»  348 

i.  3    393^ 

i.  8   400 

i.  9   401 

i.  10-12   126 

i.  11   228 

i.  19   190 

i.  20   171, 

ii.  9   348 

iii.  18    212,  381 

iii.  19    147,  212 

iii.  19,  20    377 

iii.  21    288 

iv.  6    212,  393 

iv.  11   275 

iv.  14   229 

iv.  18   374 

iv.  19   37 

II.  S.  Peter. 

i.  4   292 

i.  10   347 

i.  21   255 

ii.  11   85 

iii.  7,  10,  12   396 

iii- 8    30^395 

iii.  13    404 

I.  S.  John. 

i.  5   35»  36 

i.  7   248,325 

ii.  1   200 

ii.  2   331 

ii.  29   293 

iii.  1    295 


I.  S.  John. 

PAGE 

iii.  2   \oo,  403 

iii.  9    334 

iii.  24    227 

iv.  8,  16   39 

iv.  10   180 

S.  Jude. 

3    252 

6    106 

19    98 

20    333 

Revelation. 

i.  6   408 

i.  7   217 

i.  10   253 

i.  18    211,  388 

i.  20  87,  241 

ii.  17   405 

iii.  14    77 

iv.  8   16 

iv.  11   79 

V.  6    324 

V.  12   171, 

vi.  9   379 

vi.  10   384 

vii.  1   82 

vii.  10  401 

vii.  12   420 

viii.  3    85 

xii.  9   104 

xiii.  8    171,  //. 

xiv.  3,  4   406 

xiv.  13  ....  379,  385 

xiv.  14   384 

xiv.  18    82 

xvii.  8   171, 

xix.  1-3   417 

xix.  12,  13,  16  88 

XX.  5    393,  71. 

XX.  13   379 

xxi.  2    408 

xxi.  8    411 

xxi.  24   410 

xxii.  1   264 

xxii.  4  406 

xxii.  8   86 


